■:  ••  "v^ 


'VV 


■v>.'; 


^ 


,i>' 


^  PRINCETON,  N.  J.  ^'^ 


Section 


Shelf Number '\/A:^.sJtk 


;■■■.'.  ■-.y.'.WMtai-- 


<:^<^-2^ 


\ 


LECTURES 


ON 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY. 


BY  THE   LATE 

/ 

GEORGE  CAMPBELL,  D.  D. 

PRINCIPAL  OF  MARISCHAL  COLLEGE,  ABERDEEN. 

TO  WHICH  IS  ADDEDj 

HIS  CELEBRATED  ESSAY  ON  MIRACLES 

CONTAINING, 

AN  EXAMINATION  OF  PRINCIPLES  ADVANCED 
BY  DAVID  HUME,  ESQ: 


PHILADELPHIA: 

PUBLISHED  BY  B.  B.  HOPKINS,  W  CO. 

T.  L.  PLOWMAN,   PRINTER. 

i8or. 


^ 


ADVERTISEMENT. 


THE  following  discourses  on  Church  History  arfe 
a  considerable  part  of  a  course  of  Theological  Lectures, 
delivered  in  Marischal  College.  The  Author  had 
transcribed  and  revised  them,  and  was  every  year  mak- 
ing considerable  alterations  and  additions  to  the  Work, 
For  more  than  the  last  twenty  years  of  his  life,  his  Lec- 
tures to  the  Students  of  Divinity  occupied  the  greater 
part  of  his  time,  and  those  now  offered  to  the  Publick 
were  distinguished  as  the  most  curious  and  entertaining 
branch  of  the  w  hole.  By  the  hearers,  and  many  others, 
the  Publication  has  been  called  for  with  a  degree  of 
earnestness,  which  now  seldom  attends  the  appearance 
of  a  theological  performance.  Those  who  have  read 
the  other  writings  of  the  Author,  will  naturally  ex- 
pect here  something  of  that  clearness  of  apprehension, 
and  acuteness  of  investigation,  so  eminently  displayed 
in  the  Dissertation  on  Miracles,  in  answer  to  Mr. 
Hume.  And  such  as  are  acquainted  with  the  subject, 
will  admire  the  Author's  well-digested  learning,  and 
will  readily  perceive  the  importance  of  an  accurate  his- 
torical deduction  of  the  progress  of  church  power,  and 
the  establishment  of  a  hierarchy,  and  how  clear  and 


iv  ADVERTISEMENT. 

decisive  it  is,  in  all  that  may  be  termed  the  hinge  of 
the  controversy  between  high  church  and  others.  Sel- 
dom, very  seldom  indeed,  has  the  subject  been  treated 
with  the  perspicuity,  candour,  and  moderation,  which 
distinguish  the  writings  of  doctor  Campbell. 


LECTURES 


ON 


ECCLESIASTICAL   HISTORY. 


LECTURE  I. 


THE  SACRED  HISTORY. 

X  INTEND  that  the  subject  of  the  present,  and  some  suc- 
ceeding Lectures,  shall  be  the  Sacred  History,  the  first 
branch  of  the  theoretick  part  of  the  theological  course  which 
claims  the  attention  of  the  student.  This  is  subdivided  into 
two  parts  :  the  first  comprehends  the  events  which  preceded 
the  Christian  era,  the  second  those  which  followed.  The 
first,  in  a  looser  way  of  speaking,  is  included  under  the  title 
of  Jewish  History,  the  second  is  what  is  commonly  denomi- 
nated Church  History,  or  Ecclesiastical  History.  1  say  in  a 
looser  way  of  speaking  the  first  is  included  under  the  title  of 
the  Jewish  History  :  for,  in  strictness  of  speech  it  compriseih 
several  most  important  events,  which  happened  long  before 
the  existence  of  the  nation  of  the  Jews.  Such  are  the  crea- 
tion of  the  world,  the  fall  of  man,  the  universal  deluge,  the 
dispersion  of  the  human  race,  the  call  of  Abraham,  and  those 
promises  which  gave  to  man  the  early  hope  of  restoration. 
But  as  all  the  credible  information  we  have  on  these  topicks  is 
from  the  Jews,  and  intimately  connected  with  their  history, 
and  as  little  or  no  light  can  be  derived  from  the  Pagan  histo- 
ries, or  rather  fables,  that  have  a  relation  to  ages  so  remote,  it 
hath  not  been  judged  necessary  to  have  a  regard  to  these  in 
the  general  division.  It  seemed  more  natural  and  commo- 
dious to  allow  all  that  part  of  sacred  history  which  preceded 
the  commencement  of  the  christian  church,  to  come  under  the 
common  name  of  Jewish. 


6  LECTURES  ON 

Need  any  arguments  be  used  in  order  to  evince,  that  every 
theological  student  should  make  this,  at  least,  as  far  as  the  bibli- 
cal records  bring  us,  a  particular  object  of  his  application  ? 
In  every  view  we  can  take  of  the  subject,  it  is  suitable,  in 
some  it  is  even  necessary.  Let  it  be  observed,  that  all  the 
ariicles  of  our  faith  may  be  divided  into  three  classes.  Some 
may  not  improperly  be  denominated  philosophical,  some  histo- 
rical,  and  some  prophetical.  Of  the  first  kind,  the  philoso- 
phical^ are  those  which  concern  the  divine  nature  and  perfec- 
tions, those  also  which  concern  human  nature,  its  capacities 
and  duties  ;  of  the  second  kind,  the  historical,  are  those  which 
relate  to  the  creation,  the  fall,  the  deluge,  the  iVsDsaick  dispen- 
sation, the  promises,  the  incarnation  of  the  Messiah,  his  life, 
his  death,  his  resurrection,  his  ascension,  the  descent  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  the  mission  of  the  apostles,  and  the  several  pur- 
poses which,  by  these  means,  it  pleased  the  divine  Providence 
to  effectuate  ;  of  the  third,  or  the  prophetical  kind,  are  those 
which  regard  events  yet  future,  such  as  the  second  coming  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  resurrection  of  the  human  race, 
the  general  judgment,  eternity,  heaven  and  hell.  As  there- 
fore a  considerable  portion  of  the  christian  faith  consists  in 
points  of  an  historick  nature,  it  must  be  of  consequence  for 
elucidating  these,  to  be  acquainted  with  those  collateral  events, 
if  I  may  so  express  myself,  which  happen  to  be  connected 
with  any  of  them  by  the  circumstances  of  time  and  place. 

But  this  knowledge  is  of  importance  to  us  not  only  for  the 
illustration  of  the  christian  doctrine,  but  for  its  confirmation 
also.  When  the  religion  of  Christ  was  first  promulgated 
throughout  the  world,  as  the  difficulties  it  had  to  encounter 
would  have  been  absolutely  insurmountable,  had  no  other 
than  ordinary  and  human  means  been  employed  in  its  favour, 
it  pleased  God,  by  an  extraordinary  interposition  of  provi- 
dence, in  the  gift  of  miraculous  powers^  to  ensure  success  to 
this  great  design,  in  defiance  of  all  the  powers  of  the  earth 
combined  against  it.  But  no  sooner  was  the  strength  of  the 
opposition  broken,  insomuch  that  the  friends  and  the  enemies 
of  Christ  came,  if  I  may  so  express  myself,  to  stand  on  even 
ground,  than  it  pleased  heaven  to  withdraw  those  supernatural 
aids,  and  leave  this  cause  to  force  its  way  in  the  world,  by  its 
own  intrinsick  and  external  evidence.  I  would  not  by  this  be 
understood  to  insinuate,  that  the  christian  cause  hath  not 
always  been  under  the  protection  of  a  special  and  over-ruling 
providence.  I  would  not  be  understood  to  signify,  that  any 
external  means  whatever  could  have  given  to  our  religion  its 
full  effect  on  the  hearts  and  consciences  of  men,  without  the 
internal  influences  of  the  divine  spirit.     I  only  mean  to  ob- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  T 

serve  to  you,  what  was  certainly  the  fact,  that,  when  matters 
came  to  be  thus  balanced  between  faith  and  unbelief,  outward 
miracles  apd  prodigies  were  not  judged  by  the  supreme  dis- 
poser of  all  events,  to  be  any  longer  necessary  for  silencing 
gainsayers,  and  for  reaching  conviction  to  the  understanding. 

That  the  power  of  working  miracles  did  at  first  accompany 
the  publication  of  the  gospel  by  the  apostles,  we  have  at  this 
day  the  strongest  evidence,  as  from  other  sources,  so  especially 
from  the  success  of  their  preaching,  which,  without  this  help, 
would  be  utterly  unaccountable,  and  in  direct  contradiction  to 
all  the  laws  of  probability  hitherto  known  in  the  world.  For 
not  to  mention  the  inveterate  prejudices  arising  from  imme- 
morial opinious  and  practices,  as  well  as  from  mistaken  inte- 
rest, which  the  first  preachers  of  Christianity  had  to  encoun- 
ter, not  to  mention  the  universal  contempt  and  detestation 
wherein  the  nation  to  which  they  belonged  was  holden,  both 
by  the  Greeks  and  by  the  Romans,  not  to  mention  the  appa- 
rent ridicule  and  absurdity  there  was  in  exhibiting  to  the 
world,  as  a  saviour  and  mediator  with  God,  a  Jew,  who  had 
been  ignomjniously  crucified  as  a  malefactor  by  a  Roman  pro- 
curator, how  inconceivably  unequal  must  have  been  the  com- 
bat, when  on  the  one  side  were  power,  rank,  opulence,  birth, 
learning,  and  art  j  and  on  the  other  side,  weakness,  depend- 
ance,  poverty,  obscurity,  and  illiterate  simplicity.  The  suc- 
cess of  the  last  in  a  warfare  so  disproportionately  matched, 
is  an  irrefragable  demonstration,  that  the  work  was  not  of  man, 
but  of  God.  But  as  the  conviction  we  have  of  the  reality  of 
those  events,  and  of  the  means  by  which  they  were  effected, 
is  derived  to  us  through  the  channel  of  testimony,  it  behoves 
us  to  be  as  careful  as  possible,  in  order  that  the  evidence  may- 
have  its  full  effect  upon  us,  that  we  be  right  informed,  both 
as  to  the  nature  of  the  testimony  itself,  and  as  to  the  charac- 
ter and  capacity  of  the  witnesses.  This  is  one  consideration, 
which  immediately  affects  the  evidence  of  the  christian  reve- 
lation. 

Again,  as  the  last  mentioned  dispensatioti  is  erected  on  the 
mosaical,  the  divine  origin  of  which  it  every  where  pre-sup- 
poseth  ;  whatever  affects  the  credibility  of  the  latter,  will  un- 
questionably affect  the  credibility  of  the  former ;  whatever 
tends  to  subvert  the  basis,  tends  of  necessity  to  overturn  the 
superstructure;  and,  on  the  contrary,  when  once  the  connex- 
ion between  the  two  establishments,  the  mosaick  and  the 
christian,  is  thoroughly  understood,  whatever  tends  to  confirm 
the  one,  tends  also,  though  more  indirectly,  to  confirm  the 
other.  This  reflection  naturally  leads  us  to  carry  our  re- 
searches farther  back,  and  endeavour,  as  much  as  possible,  to 


8  LECTURES  ON 

get  acquainted  with  all  those  circumstances  and  events,  which 
can  throw  any  light  upon  the  scripture  history. 

But  it  may  be  objected,  that  if  all  this  were  necessary  to 
confirm  our  iaith  in  the  gospel,  what  would  be  the  case  of  the 
bulk  of  mankind,  who,  by  reason  of  the  time  they  must  employ 
in  earning  a  subsistence,  have  no  leisure  for  such  inquiries  ; 
and,  by  reason  of  the  education  they  have  received,  are  not 
jn  a  capacity  of  making  them  ?  To  this  objection  a  twofold 
answer  may  be  returned  :  first,  such  inquiries  are  not  neces-^ 
sary  to  the  man,  who,  through  want  of  education  and  of  time, 
is  incapacitated  for  prosecuting  them.  Those  very  wants, 
which  unfit  him  for  the  study,  are  his  great  security  that  he 
shall  have  no  occasion  for  it.  The  man  of  letters,  on  the  con- 
trary, whose  time  is  much  at  his  own  disposal,  is  daily  exposed, 
especially  in  this  age  and  country,  both  from  reading  and  from 
conversation,  to  meet  with  objections  against  revealed  reli- 
gion, which  the  other  has  no  probability  of  ever  hearing  ;  and 
which,  if  he  should  by  any  accident  come  to  hear,  it  is  a  thou- 
sand to  one  he  does  not  understand.  As  our  resources,  there- 
fore, ought  to  be  in  proportion  to  our  needs,  and  as  our  means 
and  methods  of  defence  ought  to  be  adapted  to  the  particular 
ways  wherein  we  are  liable  to  be  attacked,  there  is  a  peculiar 
reason  which  men  of  letters  have  for  entering  so  far  at  least 
into  these  inquiries,  as  to  be  acquainted  with  both  sides  of  the 
question,  and  to  be  equitable  judges  between  the  friends  and  the 
enemies  of  the  Gospel.  There  is  also  another  reason,  which 
ought  to  determine  those  in  particular  who  have  the  holy  mi- 
nistry in  view.  It  is  their  business,  and  therefore  in  a  special 
manner  their  duty,  to  be  furnished,  as  much  as  possible,  for  re- 
moving not  only  their  own  doubts,  but  the  doubts  of  other  peo- 
ple. It  is  their  province  to  support  the  weak,  to  confirm  the 
doubting,  and  to  reclaim  thg  strayed.  In  spiritual  matters,  es- 
pecially, they  ought  to  serve  as  eyes  to  the  blind,  and  feet  to 
the  lame. 

But  further,  the  knowledge  of  the  sacred  history  is  not  on= 
ly  of  importance  for  illustrating  the  truths  of  our  religion,  and 
for  strengthening  the  evidences  of  its  divinity,  but  also  in  the 
way  of  ornament  and  recommendation  to  the  ministerial  -  cha- 
racter. Nor  let  it  be  imagined  that  this  is  a  matter  of  little 
moment.  It  will  not  require  an  uncommon  share  of  penetra- 
tion to  discover,  that  this,  on  the  contrary,  is  a  matter  of  the 
greatest  consequence.  Whatever  tends  to  adorn  the  charac- 
ter of  a  pastor,  and  render  him  respectable,  is  sure  of  procur- 
ing him  in  general  a  more  favourable  reception  with  mankind. 
When  he  speaks,  he  commands  a  closer  attention,  which  gives 
double  weight  to  every  thing  he  says.     It  is  this  respect  to  su- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  9 

periority  In  knowledge  and  discernment,  which  makes,  as  Job 
poetically  expresseth  it,  even  princes  refrain  talking,  and  the 
nobles  lay  their  hand  upon  their  mouth.  The  utility  ©f  every 
such  qualification,  as  serves  to  attract  this  veneration,  will  be 
readily  acknowledged  by  all  who  are  duly  sensible  how  great  a 
point  in  instructing  is  carried,  when  the  people  to,  be  instruct- 
ed are  induced  seriously  to  attend,  to  think,  to  feel. 

Thus  much  shall  suffice  for  what  regards  the  propriety  of  the 
study,  and  the  several  purposes  of  illustrating,  confirming,  and 
recommending  our  religion,  which  it  is  fitted  to  serve.  Let 
us  next  inquire  into  the  manner  in  v/hich  we  may  hope  success- 
fully to  prosecute  it.  And  here  I  beg  leave  to  take  notice  by 
the  way,  that  it  is  not  my  intention,  either  on  this,  or  any 
other  branch  of  the  theological  science,  or  on  what  more  im- 
mediately regards  the  pastoral  care,  to  recommend  to  your 
perusal  a  multitude  of  books.  Nothing  could  be  easier,  for 
one  who  has  the  honour  to,  give  lessons  in  theology,  than  to 
present  the  students  with  a  long  catalogue  of  authors,  who 
have,  with  some  reputation,  treated  the  various  topics  to  be 
studied.  You  might  get  in  one  half  hour  the  titles  of  more 
volumes,  than  a  whole  life-time  would  suffice  you  to  read  over. 
There  are  several  reasons  which  induce  me  to  be  rather  spar- 
ing on  this  article.  In  the  first  place  there  is,  in  the  practice 
of  accumulating  the  names  of  books  and  authors,  adding  vo- 
lume to  volume,  and  folio  to  folio,  something  very  forbidding, 
which  tends  greatly  to  dishearten  the  young  learner.  The  la- 
bour appears  immense,  and  the  difficulties  insuperable.  The 
toils  he  hath  to  undergo,  and  the  obstacles  he  hath  to  sur° 
mount,  are  all  set  full  in  his  view ;  and  that  before  he  is  made 
so  sensible  of  the  charms  of  the  pursuit,  as  to  be  heartily  en- 
gaged in  it,  and  animated  to  persist  in  defiance  of  every  thing 
that  might  discourage  or  oppose  him.  The  conduct  of  nature, 
in  this  respect,  is  more  worthy  of  imitation.  She  commonly 
renders  the  first  difficulty  a  screen,  by  which  the  second  is  con- 
cealed from  sight ;  the  second  answers  the  same  purpose  to 
the  third,  and  so  forwards.  In  travelling  over  a  ridge  of 
mountains,  like  the  Alps  or  Pyrenees,  every  summit  the  tra- 
veller approaches  he  imagines  to  be  the  highest ;  and  it  is  not 
till  he  has  reached  it,  that  he  is  sensible  he  must  climb  stili 
higher.  And  this  is  what  will  happen  to  him  for  several  suc- 
cessive times.  Now  there  is  this  advantage  in  this  gradual 
opening  of  the  scene,  that  the  time  he  has  already  spent,  and 
the  difficulties  he  hath  already  overcome,  prove  the  most  co- 
gent arguments  with  him,  not  to  lose  his  past  time  and  labour 
by  giving  over  the  pursuit.  The  farther  he  advances,  these 
arguments  have  the  greater  weight.     And  thus,  by  the  help 


^0  LECTURES  ON 

pf  a,  growing  zeal  and  perseverance,  a  man  will,  with,  honouv 
and  advantage,  come  off  victorious  in  an  enterprise,  which, 
had  he  seen  from  the  beginning  all  its  difficulty,  he  had  never 
uiidertaken. 

A  second  reason  for  using  this  ^^ethocl  is,  the  great  variety 
of  studies  in  which  4he  divine,  as  you  have  seen,  must  necessa- 
rily be  conversant.  None  of  them  can,  without  hurt  both  to 
his  reputa,tiQn  and  usefulness,  be  entirely  neglected.  Now 
the  greater  diversity  there  is  of  subjects  in  this  study,  th,e 
^ore  the  inquiry  into  each  ought  to  be  simplified,  that  t^te 
young  student  may  neither  be  perplexed,  and,  as  it  were,  lose 
himself  in  a  cumbersome  multiplicity  ;  nor  so  attach  himself! 
to  one  part  of  the  study,  as  to  swallow  u,p  all  the  time  that 
should  be  employed  on  the  other  parts.  He  ought  to  be  in- 
troduced into  every  province  of  this  extensive  country  :  the 
most  patent  roads  should  be  poin,te4  ou^  to  him  :  a,  perfect  ac= 
quaintance  with  each  must  be  the  work  of  time,  and  the  fruit 
of  his  own  assiduity  and  labour.  Or  dropping  the  nrietaphor  : 
of  every  separate  article  of  this  study,  he  ought,  in  the  schools 
of  divinity,  to  acquire  sonie  general  notions  ;  but  to  attain  a 
thorough  proficiency  in  them  all,  is  rather  the  business  of  a 
r^fe-time,  than  the  effect  of  a  few  years  application.  It  is  in- 
deed in  this,  as  in  every  other  art  or  science,  the  foundation 
only  is  laid  at  school,  the  manner  of  building  is  indicated  j  the 
scholar  may  afterwards  rear  the  superstructure,  as  high  as  his 
disposition  and  pppprtuni,ties  shall  enable  him.  Now  it  is  my 
design  here,  rather  to  Jay  a  wide  foundation,  on  which  a  goodly 
edifice  n>ay  in  time  be  erected  ;  though  I  should  make  but  lit'? 
tie  or  no  progress  in  raising  the  walls,  than  on  a  narrow  bot- 
tom, to  advance  farther  in  the  building  ;  because,  in  this  case, 
the  fabrick,  though  it  be  raised  ever  so  high,  naust,  by  reason 
of  the  straitened  limits  to  which  its  fou,ndati,oi;i  d,oes  necessari^ 
ly  confine  it,  be  both  mean  and  incommodious. 

I  shall  assign  a  third  reaspn  for  not  harassing  my  hearers, 
by  recommending  a  great  variety  of  books.  Young  people  are 
but  too  apt  to  imagine,  that  learning  and  reading  are  synony? 
tsaous,  terms,  and  that  a  man  is  always  the  more  learned  the 
more  he  has  read.  Nothing  can  be  a  more  egregious  mistake. 
Food  is  necessary  for  the  support  of  the  body,  and  without  a 
competency  of  it,  we  could  not  enjoy  either  vigour  or  health  j 
but  we  shoi^ld  not  suspect  him  to  be  overstocked  with  wisdom, 
\^ho  should  coiiclude  from  this  concession,  that  the  more  a 
i^an  eats,  the  more  healthy  and  vigorous  he  must  be.  We 
know  from  experience,  that  when  a  certain  proportion  is  ex-? 
ceeded,  those  corporeal  endowments,  health  and  strength, 
me  impaired  i>y  the  very  m^ans,  which,  if  used  in  moderation.. 


ECCLEStAStlCAL  HI^TdHY.  ii 

Vdiild  have  inct^eased  them.  The  same  thing  exactly  hold^ 
with  reading,  which  is  the  food  of  the  mind;  The  memory 
may  be  loaded  and  encumbered  in  the  one  case^  as  the  stomacE 
is  in  the  other.  Alnd  in  either  case,  if  we  take  more  than  we 
can  digest,  it  can  hevet  turn  to  good  account.  There  have 
been  instances  6f  such  helltiones  Ubrofum^  such  book-gluttons, 
as  very  much  resembled  the  lean  kine  in  Pharaoh's  vision, 
vrhichi  when  they  had  devoured  the  fat  and  well-favoured  kine^ 
were  themselves  as  lean  and  ill-favoured  as  befote.  It  is  in- 
deed necessary  that  we  accustom  ourselves  t6  read  :  but  it  is 
likewise  necessary,  and  rtiuch  more  difficult,  that  We  accus- 
tom ourselves  to  reflect.  There  ought  to  be  stated  times  for 
both  exercises ;  but  to  the  last,  particularly,  our  best  eridea* 
Vours  ought  frequently  to  be  directed.  And  for  this  purpose^ 
I  kiiowno  better  helps,  than  to  be  obliged,  sometimes  bv  con- 
versation^ sometiiiies  b)'  composing,  to  express  oiir  sentiments 
oh  the  subjects  of  Which  wfe  readi  The  use  which  the  student 
makes  of  the  food  of  the  mirid)  bears  th^  closest  analogy  to  the 
iise  which  the  ruminating  animals  make  of  their  pasture* 
They  recall  it  and  ehjoy  it  a  second  time  to  much  greater  ad- 
Vantage  than  the  first.  Resemble  them  in  this  particular,— -oil 
\Vhatever  you  find  instructive  often  ruminate. 

The  fourth  and  last  reasoii  I  shall  mention  is,  ivheii  a  riilth- 
ber  of  books  on  every  topick  ^re  recorhmended,  the  student 
finds  it^  I  say  not  difficult,  but  impossible,  to  get  them  all,  or 
«Ven  the  greater  part  of  them.  Fruitless  endeavours,  ofteii 
repeated^  will  in  time  extinguish  the  greatest  ardoui" ;  and 
from  finding  part  of  our  task  impracticable,  we  are  but  toO  apt 
to- grow  careless  about  the  whole.  A  few  directions  exactly 
followed  are  mOre  conducive  to  bur  impi^overhent,  than  ^ 
much  greater  number  little  minded. 

But  to  return  from  this,  which  will  possibly  be  looked  on  as 
a  digression ;  the  first  thing  I  would  earnestly  recommend^ 
in  order  to  your  acquiring  the  knowledge  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment history^  is  the  frequent  and  attentive  perusal  of  the  Old 
Testament  itself.  Let  not  this  reconfimeftdation,  far  the  most 
important  I  can  give,  be  the  more  lightly  esteemed  by  any  of 
yoiij  because  it  is  a  book  so  common j  a  book  wlvich  all  rtieh, 
learned  and  unlearned,  haVe  access  tO.  Are  not  th^  greatest 
blessings  always  the  conimonest  ?  Such  is  the  sun,  that  glori- 
ous luminary  which  enlightens  us,  the  earth  which  we  inha- 
bit, and  the  air  which  we  breathe.  Or  are  these  invaluable 
benefits  the  leSs  regarded  by  the  pious  and  judicious,  because 
of  their  commonness  ?  Indeed  it  may  be  thought,  that  ever  s6 
great  proficiency  in  the  knowledge  of  a  book,  which  is  iii  every 
body's  hands,  can  never  procure  si  man  the' envied  characteur 


i2  LECttjRESON 

of  erudition.  True  ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  will  not  that  Ve- 
ry circumstance  of  its  universality  justly  fix  the  brand  of  igno- 
rance on  him,  in  whom  there  appears,  in  this  respect,  a  re- 
markable deficiency  ?  Besides,  to  be  ignorant  in  one's  own 
profession,  is  always  accounted  a  matter  of  the  greatest  re- 
proach :  the  divine  is,  by  profession,  an  interpreter  of  Scrip- 
ture •,  therefore,  to  be  deficient  here,  is  the  most  unpardon- 
able kind  of  ignorance.  I  am  the  more  particular  on  this 
point,  because,  by  a  very  common  tendency  in  our  nature, 
what  we  think  we  have  it  in  our  power  to  do  at  any  time,  we 
are  apt,  by  perpetually  procrastinating,  to  leave  undone  at  last* 

But,  it  may  be  asked,  in  what  manner  shall  we  read  this 
book  most  profitably  for  the  attaining  of  a  thorough  acquain- 
tance with  the  history  it  contains  ?  For  this  purpose,  I  would 
humbly  suggest  to  you  some  such  method  as  the  following  : 
it  will  require  but  a  superficial  notion  of  the  whole  to  be  able 
to  distinguish  the  most  remarkable  epochs  in  sacred  history  ; 
let  these  be  marked  for  heads  of  study  at  different  times.  It 
is  not  a  matter  of  great  consequence,  whether,  in  the  division 
you  make,  you  consider  most  the  celebrity  of  the  era  at  which 
the  period  terminates,  or  what  will  nearly  produce  an  equal 
division  of  the  subject.  Let  the  first  epoch,  for  example,  be 
from  the  creation  till  the  call  of  Abraham  ;  the  second,  from 
that  period  till  Jacob's  journey  into  Egypt ;  the  third,  till  the 
deliverance  from  Egypt,  by  the  passing  through  the  Red  Sea, 
and  the  extinction  of  Pharaoh's  host ;  the  fourth,  till  the  death 
of  Moses  ;  the  fifth,  till  the  death  of  Joshua ;  the  sixth,  till 
the  commencement  of  the  Israelitish  monarchy  ;  the  seventh, 
till  the  defection  of  the  ten  tribes  from  Rehoboam  ;  the  eighth, 
till  the  captivity ;  and  the  ninth,  till  the  restoration  of  the  two 
tribes,  Judah  and  Benjamin.  Let  the  student,  first,  atten- 
tivel}^  read  over  so  much  of  the  sacred  volume  as  contains  the 
account  of  one  period  ;  let  him  then  lay  by  the  book,  and  write 
in  his  own  style  and  manner,  an  abstract,  or  abridgment,  of 
the  narrative  he  has  read,  >  carefully  noting  all  the  memorable 
events,  and  interspersing  such  remarks  of  his  own,  as  he  shall 
judge  to  arise  naturally  out  of  the  subject.  After  finishing  one 
epochj  let  him  proceed  in  the  same  manner  to  the  succeeding 
epoch.  By  this  method,  he  will  fix  in  his  mind  the  sacred  his- 
tory more  effectually,  than  it  could  be  done  by  twenty  read- 
ings. 

Besides,  there  are  several  other  very  considerable  advanta- 
ges which  will  redound  from  this  plan  regularly  prosecuted. 
First,  the  student  will  acquire  a  habit  of  reading  with  greater 
attention,  having  close  in  his  view  the  use  he  must  make  of 
what  he  reads,  immediately  after  reading  j  secondly,  he  will 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  IS 

find  this  practice  an  excellent  exercise  of  memory,  and  one  of 
the  best  methods  of  strengthening  it ;  thirdly,  it  will  produce 
in  him  a  habit  of  reflection  ;  fourthly,  as  it  will  render  com- 
position habitual  to  him,  there  is  not  an  expedient  that  I  know 
of,  which  will  contribute  more  to  give  him  a  readiness  of  writ- 
ing his  sentiments  on  any  subject  with  a  natural  facility,  and 
perspicuity  of  expression. 

Permit  me  to  add  a  few  more  directions  for  assisting  you  in 
the  prosecution  of  the  plan  proposed.  In  periods,  of  which 
an  account  is  given  by  more  than  one  of  the  inspired  his- 
torians, it  will  be  proper  to  read  both  accounts,  and  com- 
pare them  together ;  those,  for  example,  given  in  the 
books  of  Kings,  and  in  the  books  of  Chronicles,  before  you 
begin  to  compose  the  intended  abstract.  It  will  not  be  im- 
proper to  join,  in  like  manner,  the  reading  of  the  prophets, 
with  those  parts  of  the  history  which  relate  to  the  times 
wherein  they  lived.  The  historians,  and  the  prophets,  will  often 
be  found  to  reflect  light  upon  each  other.  As  to  other  helps, 
the  chief  I  would  recommend  to  you  is  Josephus,  the  Jewish 
historian  J  and  the  best  way  of  studying  him,  as  I  imagine,  is 
carefully  to  read  his  relation  of  every  particular  epoch,  imme-^ 
diately  after  perusing  the  account  of  it  given  by  the  inspired 
penmen  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  far  as  their  history  extends. 
Both  may  be  read  previously  to  the  attempt  of  forming  a  nar- 
rative of  the  different  periods  as  mentioned  above.  In  this 
there  will  be  a  twofold  advantage  ;  first,  by  the  double  repre- 
sentation of  the  facts,  there  is  a  probability  they  will  be  more 
deeply  rooted  in  the  memory  ;  secondly,  by  the  diversity  of 
manner  in  which  the  same  things  are  told,  a  fuller  view  iS' 
given  of  the  subject,  and  the  reader's  own  manner  is  better  se- 
cured against  too  close  an  imitation  of  either. 

Before  I  conclude  this  lecture,  allow  me  to  subjoin  a  few  re- 
marks in  regard  to  the  character  of  that  historian,  and  the  cre- 
dit that  is  due  to  him.  That  he  was  a  man,  who,  to  a  consi- 
derable degree  of  eminence  in  the  Jewish  erudition  of  those 
days,  added  a  tolerable  share  of  Greek  and  Roman  literature,  is 
a  character  which,  in  my  opinion,  cannot  justly  be  refused 
him.  As  a  compiler  of  history,  it  must  be  admitted,  that  ia 
every  instance  in  which  his  account,  on  a  fair  examination,  is 
found  to  contradict  the  account  given  in  holy  writ,  he  is  enti- 
tled to  no  faith  at  ail.  In  cases  wherein  he  may  be  said  not  to 
contradict  scripture,  but  to  differ  considerably  from  it,  by 
the  detail  of  additional  circumstances,  it  will  be  proper  to  dis- 
tinguish between  the  earlier  ages  of  his  history  and  the  later 
ages.  With  regard  to  the  first,  we  are  sure  that  he  had  no 
Mother  authenti<:k  records  to  draw  his  information  from,  thaa 


i^  LECTURES  ON 

those  we  have  at  this  day  in  our  hands.  TTiese  are  Moses^ 
and  those  prophets,  who  came  nearest  to  the  time  of  that  law- 
giver. With  regard  to  the  last,  though  within  the  era  of  the 
Old  Testament  history,  we  are  not  so  certain^  that  he  might 
not  have  had  the  assistance  of  credible  annals  extant  in  his 
time,  though  now  lost.  There  are  two  things,  however,  in  his 
character,  that  affect  his  manner  of  writing,  and  require  a  par- 
ticular attention  :  one  is,  too  close  an  affectation  of  the  manner 
of  the  Greek  historians.  This  appears^  as  in  the  general  tenour 
of  his  style,  so  especially  in  the  endeavours  he  uses  to  embel- 
lish his  narration  with  long  speeches,  v/hich  he  puts  in  the 
mouths  of  the  persons  introduced,  a  silly  device  for  displaying 
the  talents  and  eloquence  of  the  writers  rather  than  of  the  his* 
torical  characters*  I  cannot  help  taking  notice  of  one  instance, 
in  which,  through  an  ill-judged  attempt  to  improve  and  adorn, 
he  hath  spoiled,  one  of  the  finest  speeches  in  all  the  history* 
The  speech  I  mean,  is  that  of  Judah  to  his  brother  Joseph^ 
then  governour  of  Egypt,  offering  to  ransom  his  brother  Ben* 
jamin,  by  the  sacrifice  of  his  own  liberty*  It  is  impossible  for 
any  one,  whose  taste  can  relish  genuine  simple  nature,  not  to 
be  deeply  affected  with  that  speech  as  it  is  in  the  Pentateuch* 
On  reading  it,  we  are  perfectly  prepared  for  the  effect  which  it 
produced  on  his  unknown  brother.  We  see,  we  feel,  that  it 
was  impossible  for  humanity,  for  natural  affection,  to  hold  out 
longer.  In  Josephus,  it  is  a  very  different  kind  of  performance : 
isomething  so  cold,  so  far-fetched,  so  artificial,  both  in  seriti- 
tnents  and  in  language,  that  it  savours  more  of  one  Who  had 
been  educated  in  the  schools  of  the  Greek  sophists,  than  of 
those  plain,  artless,  patriarchal  shepherds. 

The  other  thing  that  deserves  our  notice  in  this  author,  is 
the  excessive  fear  he  had  of  exposing  himself  to  the  ridicule  Of 
his  Greek  and  Roman  readers,  whose  favour  he  very  assiduous- 
ly courts.  This  hath  made  him  express  himself  on  some  points 
with  such  apparent  skepticism,  as  hath  induced  many  to  think, 
that  he  was  not  a  firm  believer  in  his  own  religion^  But  this< 
on  a  closer  examination,  will  be  found  entirely  without  founda- 
tion :  on  the  contrary,  he  piques  himself  not  a  little,  on  the  dis- 
tinction of  his  nation  from  all  others,  by  the  knowledge  arid 
worship  of  the  true  God.  But  he  did  not  write  his  history  t6 
make  proselytes,  and  therefore  chose  to  put  On  those  parts  of 
his  work  which  he  thought  would  expose  him  most  to  the 
sneer  of  the  infidel,  such  a  gloss  as  would  make  it  pass  more 
easily  with  gentile,  and  even  with  philosophical  readers,  (for  he 
had  an  eye  to  both)  amongst  whom  he  knew  the  Jews  were 
branded  with  credulity,  even  to  a  proverb.  It  may  be  thought, 
indeed,  that  with  regard  to  the  more  ancient  part  of  his  histo- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  15 

jy,  as  nothing  in  point  of  fact  can  be  got  from  it,  which  is  not 
to  be  learnt  from  the  Bible,  that  part,  at  least,  can  be  of  little 
or  no  service  to  christians.  But  even  this  conclusion  woulcl 
not  be  just.  As  the  historian  himself  was  a  pharisee,  a  con- 
temporary of  the  apostles,  and  one  who  lived  till  after  the 
destruction  of  the  Jewish  temple  and  polity  by  Titus  Vespa'? 
sian,  we  may  reap  instruction  even  from  his  errours.  They 
y/ill  serve  to  show,  what  were  the  tenets  of  the  sect  at  that 
time,  what  were  their  notions  both  concerning  historical 
events,  and  sacred  institutions,  and  what  were  some  of  their 
principal  traditions.  All  this  to  the  christian  divine  is  a  mat- 
ter of  no  little  consequence  for  the  elucidation  of  several  pas- 
sages in  the  New  Testament,  which  allude  to  such  erroneous 
sentiments,  and  vain  traditions.  From  the  time  of  the  re- 
building of  the  temple  under  Ezra,  to  its  final  demolition, 
and  the  total  extinction  of  the  Jewish  government  by  the  Ro- 
mans, Josephus  alone  affords  almost  all  the  light  we  have. 

The  two  books  of  Maccabees  are  the  only  other  ancient 
monuments  now  extant  of  the  transactions  of  that  people 
within  the  aforesaid  period.  These  books,  though  they  are  not 
acknowledged  by  protestants  to  be  canonical  scripture,  very 
well  deserve  your  attention  as  historical  tracts  of  considerable 
antiquity,  and,  to  all  appearance,  worthy  of  credit.  We  have, 
indeed,  in  English,  an  excellent  work  of  Prideaux,  called. 
The  Connexion  of  the  Old  Testament  history  with  that  of  the 
New,  which  1  would  also  earnestly  recommend  to  your  peru- 
sal. I  hope  I  scarcely  need  to  mention,  that  it  is  more  proper 
for  the  student  to  read  Josephus  in  his  own  language  than  in  a 
translation :  it  will  thus  answer  a  double  end,  as  an  exercise 
in  Gre^k  as  well  as  in  history. 

To  the  knowledge  of  the  sacred,  it  will  be  found  proper  to 
add  as  much  at  least  of  profane  history,  as  is  most  nearly  con-f 
liected  with  it,  and  may  serve  to  throw  some  light  upon  it, 
together  with  a  little  of  the  chronology  and  the  geography  of 
the  times  and  the  countries  about  which  the  history  is  conver- 
sant. The  connexion  which  the  four  great  monarchies,  the 
Assyrian,  the  Persian,  the  Macedonian,  and  the  Roman,  have 
with  the  Jewish  history,  is  manifest;  but  as  to  these,  it  is  by 
no  means  requisite  that,  in  this  place,  I  should  be  particular. 
The  Jewish  history  is  necessary  to  the  theologian,  the  others 
are  useful.  The  former  ought  to  be  begun  immediately,  the 
latter  should  be  studied  afterwards,  as  you  find  leisure  and 
opportunity  :  but  we  do  not  incline  to  embarrass  you  with  ^ 
needless  multiplicity  of  directions. 

In  the  next  prelection,  I  intend  to  begin  with  some  obser- 
vations on  the  history  of  the  ssicre4  qanon. 


LECTURE3  OH 


{-^^  LECTURE  IL 


X  HE  subject  of  this  day's  discourse  is,  as  I  hinted  to 
you  at  a  former  meeting,  some  observations  on  the  nature  and 
utility  of  the  history  of  the  sacred  canon ;  to  which  I  shall 
add  some  reflections,  tending  to  explain  both  the  origin  and 
the  character  of  that  species  of  history  which  is  denominated 
ecclesiastical.  As  to  the  history  of  the  canon,  it  will  be  pro- 
per, in  the  first  place,  to  give  an  explanation  of  the  phrase. 
That  book  which  we  christians  denominate  the  Bible^  uBi^xtg, 
the  book,  by  way  of  eminence,  and  which  is  also  termed  the 
canon^  and  the  sacred  canon^  comprehends  a  considerable  num- 
ber of  treatises,  or  pieces  totally  distinct,  composed  (for  the 
most  part)  at  periods  distant  from  one  another,  and  in  sundry- 
places,  written  by  diverse  penmen,  on  different  subjects,  and 
in  various  styles  :  nor  were  they  all  originally  in  the  same  lan- 
guage. The  greater  part  of  the  books  which  compose  the  Old 
Testament,  are  in  Hebrew,  a  small  part  in  Chaldee,  and  all  the 
books  of  the  New  Testament  in  Greek  ;  at  least,  if  the  origi- 
nals of  any  of  them  were  in  another  tongue,  they  are  not  now 
extant :  some  are  in  prose,  and  others  in  verse  ;  some  are  >his-. 
torical,  some  juridical,  and  some  prophetical ;  some  instruct 
us  by  the  way  of  simple  narrative ;  some  are  written  in  a 
highly  figurative  and  allegorick  diction  ;  some  in  a  vehement 
and  declamatory  ;  others  address  us  in  a  free  epistolary  strain : 
one  piece  is  a  collection  of  devotional  hymns  and  prayers, 
another  is  an  assemblage  of  moral  maxims  and  observations. 
The  name  canon^  in  like  manner  as  the  word  Bible,  we  have 
borrowed  from  the  Greek.  The  term  xww,  with  them,  sig- 
nifies rule,  or  standard.  Now  the  Scriptures  are  thus  denomi- 
nated, as  being  eminently  the  great  rule  or  standard  to  the 
christian,  in  all  that  concerns  both  faith  and  manners.  Hence 
also  those  writings,  of  whose  authenticity  and  inspiration  there 
is  sufficient  evidence,  are  termed  canonical  scripture. 

Now  concerning  the  several  books  of  which  the  Bible  is 
composed,  a  number  of  questions  naturally  arise  in  the  mind 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  it 

of  the  inquisitive  student.  Such  are  the  following :  Who 
were  the  writers  and  conipilers,  and  at  what  periods,  in  what 
places,  and  on  what  occasions,  were  the  writings  and  compila- 
tions made  ?  Whence  arises  that  authority  they  have  so  gene- 
rally obtained  ?  Has  this  been  an  immediate,  or  a  gradual  con- 
sequence, of  their  publication  ?  Has  the  christian  world  been 
utianirtiious  in  this  respect,  in  regard  to  all  these  books,  or  has 
it  been  divided,  as  to  all,  or  any  of  them?  And  il  divided, 
what  have  been  the  most  cogent  arguments  on  the  different 
sides  ?  How,  by  whom,  where,  and  when,  were  they  collected 
into  one  volume  ?  What  hath  been  their  fate  and  reception 
since  ?  What  have  been  the  most  remarkable  editions  and 
translations  they  have  undergone  ?  What  the  variations  occa- 
sioned by  these,  and  what  the  most  eminent  paraphrases  and 
commentaries  they  have  given  rise  to  ?  I  would  not  be  under- 
i3tood  by  this  enumeration,  as  meaning  to  insinuate,  that  all 
these  questions  are  of  the  same  importance.  There  is  a  ma- 
nifest and  very  considerable  difference  among  them  in  this 
respect.  A  succinct  account,  however,  of  all  the  facts,  which 
would  serve  for  a  solution  to  the  several  queries  above-men- 
tioned, those  at  least  which  are  of  principal  moment  to  the 
theologian,  would  constitute  what  is  commonly  called  the  his- 
tory of  the  sacred  canon. 

The  utility  of  such  inquiries  to  the  theologian  Is  the  point 
which  naturally  comes  next  to  be  discussed.  As  the  questions 
themselves  are  pretty  different  in  their  nature,  however  much 
connected  by  their  concurrence  in  composing  the  history  of 
the  Bible,  the  purposes  they  are  fitted  to  answer  are  also  dif- 
ferent. In  order  to  prevent  mistakes,  let  it  be  observed  once 
for  all,  that  by  the  history  of  the  Bible,  I  do  not  here  mean,  the 
history  contained  in  the  Bible,  but  the  history  of  the  compile- 
ment,  and  of  the  various  fates  of  the  book  so  denominated. 
The  same  thing  may  be  said  of  that  synonymous  phrase,  the 
history  of  the  canon.  As  to  those  queries  which  regard  the 
origin  of  the  sacred  books,  they  are  chiefly  conducive  for 
confirming  the  truth  of  our  religion  ;  and  as  to  those  which 
regard  their  reception,  good  or  bad,  with  all  the  consequences 
it  hath  produced,  they  are  chiefly  conducive  for  illustrating  its 
doctrines.  I  use  the  word  chiefly  in  both  cases,  because,  in 
inquiries  into  the  origin  of  the  scriptures,  discoveries  will 
sometimes  be  made,  which  serve  to  illustrate  and  explain  the 
meaning  of  things  contained  in  them  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand^ 
in  inquiries  into  their  reception,  with  its  consequences,  w^ 
shall  often  be  enabled  to  discover  the  grounds  of  the  favoura- 
ble reception  they  have  met  with,  and  thereby  to  trace  the 
vestiges  of  a  divine  original.     To  the  former  class  belong^ 

c 


18  LECTURES  ON 

questions  like  these  :  Who  were  the  writers  ?  When,  where^ 
for  whose  use,  and  to  what  purpose  were  they  written? 
Whence  arises  the  veneration  they  have  drawn  ?  Why,  by 
whom,  and  on  what  occasion  or  occasions,  were  they  collected  ? 
To  the  latter  class  belong  the  following.  In  what  manner  have 
they  been  receiv^ed  in  different  countries,  and  at  different  peri- 
ods ?  To  what  causes  does  the  reception,  whether  good  or  bad, 
appear  imputable  I  What  are  the  most  eminent  editions  ? 
What  are  the  principal  variations  to  be  found  in  the  editions 
and  manuscripts  still  extant  ?  What  translators  and  commen- 
tators have  been  occupied  in  conveying  and  illustrating  their 
doctrine  to  the  most  remote  nations  and  distant  ages  ?  In  the 
discussion  of  such  questions,  especially  in  what  regards  the 
books  of  the  New  Testament,  there  arises  a  number  of  curious 
investigations,  tending  to  discriminate  the  genuine  produc- 
tions of  the  authors,  whose  names  they  bear,  from  the  spurious 
pieces  ascribed  to  them,  the  authentick  dictates  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  from  those  which,  at  most,  can  only  be  styled  apocry- 
phal, that  is  hidden  or  doubtful.  That  the  church  was  early 
pestered  with  a  multitude  of  fictitious  accounts  of  the  life  of 
Christ,  and  the  labours  of  his  apostles,  is  manifest  not  only 
from  the  concurrent  testimony  of  all  antiquity,  but  even  from 
the  introduction  which  the  evangelist  Luke  hath  given  to  his 
Gospel :  "  Forasmuch,"  says  he,  "  as  many  have  taken  in  hand 
**  to  set  forth  in  order  a  declaration  of  those  things  Which  are 
"  most  surely  believed  among  us."  It  is  universally  acknow- 
ledged, that  John's  Gospel  was  not  written  till  a  considerable 
time  afterwards  ;  and  if  none  had  preceded  Luke  in  this  work 
but  Matthew  and  Mark,  he  would  never  have  denominated 
them  many.  Besides,  it  is  plain,  from  the  manner  in  which 
preceding  attempts  are  mentioned,  that  several  of  the  accounts 
that  had  been  given,  were  such  as  could  not  be  depended  on  j 
otherwise,  this  circumstance,  that  many  had  undertaken  the 
work  before  him,  instead  of  being  a  good  reason  for  his  tak- 
ing up  the  subject,  would  have  been  a  very  strong  reason  for 
his  not  doing  it,  since  christians  were  already  so  amply  sup- 
plied with  information.  But  the  very  expressions  he  uses, 
evidently  contain  an  insinuation,  at  least,  that  the  writers  he 
alludes  to,  had  not  themselves  been  sufficiently  informed  of  thc 
truth.  "  It  seemed  good  to  me,"  says  he,  "  having  had  per- 
"  feet  understanding  of  all  things,  from  the  very  first  to  write 
"  them  to  thee  in  order,  most  excellent  Theophilus." 

But  to  return  to  the  two  classes  into  which  the  questions 
relating  to  the  history  of  the  canon  were  divided,  they  will 
generally  be  found,  agreeably  to  the  observation  already  made, 
concerning  the  principal  utility  of  each,  to  be  treated  by  authors 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  19 

of  different  denominations,  and  with  different  views.  Those 
who,  as  defenders  of  revelation,  have  entered  the  lists  with  its 
adversaries,  more  especially  those,  who,  like  Stillingfleet,  in 
the  last  age,  or  Lardner,  in  the  present,  have  applied  them- 
selves to  support  the  authority  and  inspiration  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, did  always  consider  themselves  as  under  a  necessity  of 
doing  something  for  our  satisfaction,  in  regard  to  the  ques- 
tions of  the  first  order.  Those,  on  the  other  hand,  who  have 
assumed  the  character  not  of  the  champions  of  religion,  but  of 
its  interpreters,  do  commonly  attach  themselves  more  to  the 
discussion  of  the  questions  of  the  second  order.  Accordingly, 
we  find  a  great  deal  of  information  on  these  topicks  in  the  works 
of  some  of  our  scriptural  criticks;  whether  they  come  under  the 
denomination  of  scholiasts,  paraphrasts,  commentators,  trans- 
lators, or  barely  editors,  particularly  the  two  last.  The  only 
examples  of  these  I  shall  now  mention,  are,  Houbigant's  pro- 
legomena to  the  different  parts  into  which  he  has  divided  his 
Latin  version  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  Mill's  and  Wetstein's. 
prolegomena  to  the  splendid  and  valuable  editions  they  have 
given  of  the  Greek  New  Testament,  with  the  various  read-, 
ings.  These  I  only  mention  b''  the  way  as  deserving  to  be 
carefully  perused  by  you,  if  you  should  happen  to  meet  with 
them.  For  all  the  three  (especially  the  first)  being  voluminous 
and  expensive  works,  and  not  very  common,  there  are  not 
many  that,  in  this  part  of  the  world,  have  an  opportunity  of 
consulting  them. 

There  is,  indeed,  one  author,  who,  in  a  particular  work 
written  on  purpose,  has,  with  a  good  deal  of  judgment  and 
acuteness,  treated  all  the  questions  of  both  classes  above  enu- 
merated :  the  author  I  mean,  is  Richard  Simon,  a  priest  of 
the  Oratory,  commonly  known  by  the  name  of  Father  Simon. 
This  man  first  published,  in  French,  a  book,  entitled,  A  criti- 
cal History  of  the  Old  Testament^  which  was  soon  after  follow- 
ed by  another  in  the  same  language,  entitled,  A  critical  History 
of  the  Neiv  Testament ;  both  which  together  complete  the  his- 
tory of  the  sacred  canon.  This  work  has  been  translated,  not 
badly,  into  Latin.  There  is  a  translation  of  it  into  English 
[which  I  have  seen]  that  is  very  ill  executed,  in  regard  both  to 
the  sense  and  to  the  expression.  In  relation  to  the  character  of 
the  performance,  it  will  not  be  improper  to  make  here  a  i€:w 
observations.  In  the  first  place,  it  clearly  evinces  in  the  au- 
thor a  large  fund  of  erudition,  accompanied  with  an  uncommon 
share  of  critical  sagacity  and  penetration  ;  and,  I  may  justly 
add,  a  greater  degree  of  moderation,  than  is  generally  to  be 
met  with  in  those,  either  of  his  sect  as  a  romanist,  or  of  his 
o-rder  as  a  priest.     What  particularly  quali{i<id  him  for  the  task: 


20  LECTURES  ON 

be  has  undertaken,  was  not  only  his  thorough  acquaintance 
with  ancient  history,  sacred  and  profane  ;  but  his  profound 
skill  in  the  oriental  languages,  and  in  all  branches  of  rabbini- 
cal literature.  To  say  thus  much  is  no  ntiore,  in  my  appre- 
hension, than  doing  justice  to  his  abilities  and  indefatigable 
application  :  at  the  same  time,  it  is  but  doing  justice  to  you, 
my  hearers,  to  take  notice  of  what  I  think  amiss  in  his  per- 
formance. 1  told  you,  and  told  you  truly,  that  he  shows 
more  moderation  than  is  customary  with  those  of  his  sett  and 
order,  yet  not  so  much  of  impartiality,  as  not  to  betray,  on 
several  occasions,  that  (if  he  was  not  a  disguised  freethinker, 
as  has  been  suspected  oy  some  eminent  catholicks)  he  was  deep- 
ly tinctured  with  the  servile  spirit  of  his  church.  Hence  the 
implicit  deference  he  sometimes  ofriciously  displays,  to  human 
prescriptions,  to  oral  tradition,  to  those  customs  which  can 
plead  the  sanction  of  antiquity,  or  of  a  general  reception, 
however  absurd  they  may  be,  when  examined  on  the  princi- 
ples of  reason,  however  unscriptural,  or  even  antiscriptural, 
■when  examined  on  those  of  holy  writ :  nay,  I  might  add,  his 
deference  to  those  practices  and  tenets,  concerning  which  his 
knowledge  and  discernment  must  have  satisfied  him,  that  their 
origin  was  such  as  could  by  no  means  serve  to  recommend[ 
them.  Hence  also  the  propensity  he  shows,  on  every  occa- 
sion, to  insist  on  the  ambiguity  and  obscurity  of  the  scriptures, 
which  he  greatly  exaggerates,  and  on  the  need  of  an  infallible 
interpreter.  Hence  the  straitened  and  ambiguous  manner  where- 
in he  expresseth  himself  on  some  delicate  points,  which  he 
could  not  altogether  avoid  mentioning,  and  on  which  it  is 
plain  that  he  did  not  think  himself  at  liberty  to  speak  out  his 
sentiments.  On  such  topicks,  you  w'dl  perceive  a  timidity  and 
caution  very  unlike  the  generous  freedom  and  boldness  of  a 
man,  who  hath  ever  been  unaccustomed  to  the  galling  yoke 
of  human  authority.  He  puts  one  in  mind  of  the  situation 
described  by  the  poet,  and  even  appears  to  consider  himself, 
as,  incedens  per  ignes  suppcsitos  cineri  cloloso.  But  I  shall  say 
no  more  here  of  this  author,  having  had  an  occasion,  of  late, 
both  of  giving,  and  of  supporting  my  opinion,  of  him,  more 
fully  in  the  third  preliminary  dissertation  to  the  translation-  of 
the  Gospels,  to  which  I  refer  you.  As  to  his  work,  I  may 
jusdy  say,  that  on  the  whole,  with  all  its  errours  and  defects, 
(and  what  human  composition  is  exempt  from  errours  and  de- 
fects ?)  The  critical  History  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments 
contains  a  valuable  fund  of  knowledge,  and  deserves  an  atten- 
tive perusal  from  everv  serious  inquirer  into  the  divine  ora- 
cles. On  some  points,  he  has  been  warmly  opposed  by  some 
•protestant  divines,  to  whose  animadversions  on  his  work  he 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  21 

has  returned  answers.  The  controversy  is  published  in  the 
later  editions  of  his  book.  In  some  things  they  appear  to  be 
in  the  right,  but  not  in  all. 

Houbigant,  also,  another  priest  of  ^^the  oratory,  has,  in  the 
work  of  his  above-mentioned,  freely  animadverted  on  some  of 
Simon's  observations.  He  too  is  no  inconsiderable  critick, 
though  of  a  very  different  turn.  The  excess  of  Simon  (where 
alterations  appeared  necessary)  perhaps  was  ciifhdence  ;  of 
Houbigant,  temerity.  I  am  not  sure,  that  some  of  our  mo- 
dern English  criticks  on  the  Hebrew  scriptures  are  not  charge- 
able with  this  fault  of  Houbigant ;  I  mean  their  making  too 
free  with  the  text,  in  setting  aside  the  common  reading  for  the 
sake  of  emendations  merely  conjectural.  But  as  to  these 
things,  every  person  ought  to  judge  for  himself.  I  purpose  to 
lay  only  the  materials  before  you,  which  may  serve  as  pre- 
mises :  it  is  yours  to  canvass  and  arrange  them,  and  to  draw  the 
proper  conclusions.  It  is  not  my  province  to  dictate,  but  to 
suggest.  Your  assent  to  any  opinions,  that  might  be  laid 
before  you,  would  be  of  little  value,  if  it  were  the  result  of  a 
lazy  and  implicit  confidence,  and  not  of  a  careful  examination 
and  rational  conviction.  Let  me  only  subjoin,  before  dismis- 
sing this  article,  a  recommendation  of  Michaelis's  Introductory 
Lectures  to  the  sacred  books  of  the  New  Testament,  which 
will  deserve  your  serious  perusal.  Thus  much  shall  suffice  for 
what  concerns  the  history  of  the  canon,  and  the  valuable  pur- 
poses to  which  this  bianch  of  knowledge  is  subservient. 

I  proceed  now  to  consider  the  ends  which  may  be  answered 
by  ecclesiastical  history,  and  to  inquire  what  is  the  readiest  and 
most  profitable  way  of  studying  it.  Before  that  memoiabje 
era,  the  incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God,  the  history  of  the 
church  of  God  was  the  history  of  one  particular  peojile,  first 
distinguished  by  the  name  of  the  patriarch  Israel,  (otherwise. 
called  Jacob)  whose  descendants  they  were  ;  and  after  the  loss 
of  the  ten  tribes,  who  were  carried  into  captivity  by  Shalma- 
nezer,  king  of  Assyria,  denominated  from  Judah,  one  of  the 
sons  of  Jacob,  and  one  whose  progeny  the  greater  part  of  the 
remnant  were,  the  nation  of  the  Jews.  The  history  of  thijt 
people,  and  the  history  of  the  church,  was  under  the  Mo.saick 
economy  the  same  thing.  Neither  do  we  find  in  the  annals, 
and  other  remains  of  those  ancient  times,  the  k^ast  vestige  of 
the  distinction  of  a  community  into  church  and  state,  such  ari 
hath  obtained  universally  in  the  nations  who  have  received  the 
christian  law.  This  distinction  hath  given  rise  to  a  species  of 
history,  whereof  the  world  before  had  not  conceived  so  much 
as  an  idea.  It  may  not  therefore  be  irnt^roper,  in  the  first 
place,  to  trace  its  origin,  that  we  may  the  better  apprehend 
what  is  meant  by  the  history  of  the  church. 


2?  LECTURES  ON 

When  we  consider  attentively  the  institution  of  Moses,  we- 
perceive  that  it  comprehends  every  thing  necessary  for  form- 
ing a  civil  establishment ;  not  only  precepts  regarding  the  dis- 
position and  morals  of  the  people,  and  the  publick  and  private 
offices  of  religion,  but  also  laws  of  jurisprudence  ;  such  as  re^ 
gulate  the  formalities  of  private  contracts,  inheritance,  succes- 
sion, and  purchases  ;  such  as  fix  the  limits  of  jurisdiction  and 
subordination  of  judicatories,  appoint  the  method  of  procedure 
in  trials,  both  eivil  and  criminal,  and  the  punishments  to  be 
awarded  by  the  judges  to  the  several  crimes.  I  may  add,  it 
comprehends  also  a  sort  of  law  of  nations  for  the  use  of  that 
people,  in  adjusting  the  terms  of  their  intercourse  with  other 
states  and  kingdoms,  and  prescribing  rules  to  be  observed  in 
making  and  conducting  peace  and  war,  entering  into  publick 
treaties  and  the  like.  In  this  polity  or  state,  however,  we  find 
that  what  concerns  religion  forms  an  essential,  or  rather 
the  principal  part.  Every  thing  in  their  consiitaiion  seems 
to  act  in  subserviency  to  this  great  end,  the  preservation  of 
the  purity  of  their  faith  and  worship.  In  this  there  was 
a  very  material  difference  between  them  and  pagan  nations. 
In  these  last,  the  established  superstition,  ra  whatever  po- 
pular traditions  it  may  have  been  originallv  founded,  was 
modelled  by  the  ruling  powers  in  such  a  manner,  as  that 
it  might  best  answer  the  purpose  of  an  engine  of  govern- 
ment. The  religion  of  such  nations,  therefore,  can  be  consi- 
dered in  no  other  light,  than  as  one  of  those  political  machines 
which  in  various  ways  co-operated  for  the  support  of  the  whole. 
With  the  Jews,  indeed,  the  case  was  totally  different :  for,  in 
their  establishment,  the  religion  was  manifestly  not  the  means 
but  the  end. 

God  hath  been  considered  as  in  some  respect  the  chief  ma- 
gistrate or  head  of  that  community,  and  the  government  for 
that  reason  has  been  not  unfitly  termed  a  theocracy.  Thus 
much  seems  even  implied  in  the  words  of  God  to  Samuel, 
when  the  people  became  solicitous  to  have  a  king.  And  even 
when  the  kingly  sway  was  established  among  them,  the  pre- 
servation of  their  religion,  and  of  their  code  of  laws,  contained 
in  the  Pentateuch,  (for  they  had  no  other)  effectually  prevent- 
ed this  change  from  being  a  subversion  of  their  polity.  The 
king  himself  v/as  considered  (though  in  a  way  somewhat  dif- 
ferent) as  a  minister  of  religion.  His  office  was  holy,  and  he 
was  inaugurated  with  the  like  religious  ceremony  of  unction, 
with  which  the  high-priest  was  separated  for  the  discharge  of 
the  duties  of  his  sacred  function;  and  the  king's  person,  in 
consequence  of  this  rite,  was  accounted  holy  as  well  as  the 
priest*s.  A  strong  evidence  of  the  influence  of  this  circum- 
stance we  have  in  the  behaviour  of  D.avid  to  king  Saul,  his 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  23 

tnemy,  who  sought  his  life,  David  found  him  asleep  and  un- 
attended in  the  cave  of  Engeddi  ;  and  when  desired  by  some 
of  his  followers  to  kill  him,  answered,  "  The  Lord  forbid  that 
"  I  should  do  this  thing  unto  my  master,  the  Lord's  anointed, 
'*  to  stretch  forth  my  hand  against  him,  seeing  he  is  the  anoint- 
"  ed  of  che  Lord:  so  David  stayed  his  servants  with  these 
*'  words  "  iMevrtheless  the  legislative  power  was  not  in  the 
monarch.  God  was  the  sole  legislator  ;  for,  as  was  observed, 
they  had  ro  peiinanent  body  of  laws  other  than  the  books  of 
Moses  :  besides,  on  every  emergency  of  importance,  the  Deity 
was  consuUed  by  Urim  and  Thummin. 

It  must  be  acknowledged,  that  this  original  constitution  was 
gradually  corrupted  by  them.  Having  lound  means,  in  preju- 
dice to  the  divine  commandments,  to  foist  in  rules  and  pre- 
cepts of  their  own  devising,  under  the  specious  name  of  oral 
traditions,  they  rendered  them  equivalent  to  laws  ;  but  still,  as 
appears  from  the  name  they  gave  them,  under  the  pretended 
sanction  of  divine  authority.  Thus  their  religious  and  civil 
■rights  were  so  blended,  as  not  to  admit  a  separation:  the 
same  judges  indiscriminately  took  cognizance  of  both.  These 
were  the  elders  of  the  city  in  smaller  matters,  and  in  the  first 
instance  ;  and  the  great  sanhedrim,  senate,  or  council  of  the 
nation,  composed  of  seventy  senators  and  a  president,  com- 
monly called  the  elders  of  the  people,  in  greater  matters,  and 
in  the  last  resort.  And  in  this  body  there  was  generally  a  con- 
siderable number,  though  not  any  fixed  proportion,  of  priests, 
levites,  and  scribes.  I  mention,  in  conformity  to  our  modes  of 
thinking,  the  religious  and  the  civil  as  different  kinds  of  rights. 
Their  customs  and  modes  of  thinking,  on  the  contrary,  pre- 
vented their  making  this  distinction  ;  ail  being  alike  compre- 
hended in  the  same  code,  established  by  the  same  authority, 
and  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  same  magistrates.  An  at- 
tention to  this  is  necessary,  in  order  to  make  us  understand  the 
import  of  some  expressions  used  in  the  New  Testament. 
Thus  the  terms  voyM<jte<  and  vtfAsJ'iJ'etgKetxoi,  which  our  translators 
render  lawyers  and  doctors  of  law,  are  precisely  equivalent  to 
what  would  be  termed  by  us  theologists  and  doctors  of  divini- 
ty. Not  that  the  words  are  mistranslated  in  our  version :  it 
was  even  proper  in  this  case,  by  paying  a  regard  to  the  etymo- 
logy of  the  names,  in  rendering  them  into  English,  to  suggest 
to  the  unlearned  reader  the  coincidence  of  the  two  professions, 
divinity  and  law,  among  the  Hebrews.  With  them,  therefore, 
the  divine  and  the  jurist,  the  lawyer  and  the  scribe,  were  terms 
which  denoted  nearly  the  same  character  j  inasmuch  as  they 
had  no  other  law  of  nations,  or  municipal  law,  but  their  reli- 
gion, and  no  other  religion  but  their  law.  Of  any  of  the  Pa- 
gan nations  we  may  say  with  justice,  that  their  religion  was  a  po- 


24  LECTURES  ON 

lltical  religion  ;  but  of  the  Jews  we  should  say  more  properly^ 
that  their  polity  was  a  religious  polity. 

What  may  serve  to  give  us  an  idea  of  such  a  constitution  is 
the  present  state  of  the  Mahometan  world.  Though  Maho- 
metism,  in  regard  to  its  doctrine  and  its  rites,  borrows  some- 
what both  from  Judaism  and  from  Christianity,  it  is,  as  an  es- 
tablishment, raised  more  on  the  Jewish  model  than  on  the 
Christian.  With  them  the  Alcoran  is  the  only  standing  or 
statute  law  of  the  country  ;  and  as  it  is  conceived  by  them  to 
be  of  divine  authority,  and  therefore  unrepealable,  it  is  both 
the  onlyrule  in  alljudiciaryproceedings,andtheonlycheckupon 
the  despotism  of  their  princes.  Hence  it  has  happened,  that 
though  there  never  arose  such  a  conception  among  the  Jews, 
as  what  I  may  call  the  history  of  the  synagogue,  or  among 
the  Mahometans,  as  the  history  of  the  mosque,  distinct  from 
the  histories  of  their  different  nations  ;  the  christian  church 
and  christian  empires,  or  commonwealths,  form  histories, 
which,  though  connected  as  those  of  neighbouring  republicks 
or  kingdoms  may  be,  are  in  their  nature  perfectly  distinct. 
It  is  worth  while  to  inquire,  what  has  given  rise  to  this  pe- 
culiarity in  the  religion  of  Jesus.  An  inquiry  of  this  kind 
is  a  proper  introduction  to  the  study  of  ecclesiastical  his- 
tory. It  will  serve  to  throw  light  on  the  spirit  and  genius  of 
our  religion,  and  may  lead  to  the  detection  of  the  latent  springs, 
whence  originally  flowed  that  amazing  torrent  of  corruption, 
by  which,  in  process  of  time,  this  most  amiable  religion  has 
been  so  miserably  defaced. 

The  moral  precepts  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  are  remarka- 
bly sublime  and  pure.  I'hey  are  admirably  calculated  for  re- 
gulating the  passions  and  affections  of  the  heart,  out  of  which, 
as  Solomon  has  observed,  are  the  issues  of  life.  The  doc- 
trines he  taught,  which  are  the  motives  whereby  an  observance 
of  the  precepts  is  enforced,  are  all  purely  spiritual,  arising 
from  considerations  of  the  divine  nature,  and  of  our  own  ;  es- 
pecially of  God's  placability  and  favour,  of  the  testimony  of 
conscience,  of  the  blessedness  which  the  principles  of  true  re- 
ligion, faith,  and  hope,  love  to  God,  and  love  to  man,  infuse 
into  the  heart ;  and  from  considerations  regarding  the  future 
retribution  both  of  the  righteous  and  of  the  wicked.  The; 
positive  institutions  or  ceremonies  he  appointed,  are  both  few 
and  simple,  serving  as  the  expressions  of  the  love  and  grati. 
tude  of  his  disciples  to  God,  their  common  parent,  and  to 
Jesus  their  master,  the  oracle  of  God  ;  of  their  engagements 
to  the  christian  life,  and  their  perfect  union  among  themselves. 
And  that  whilst  these  institutions  were  suflPered  to  remain  in 
their  native  simplicity,  which  constituted  their  true  beauty  and 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  25 

excellence,  it  was  impossible  they  should  be  misunderstood. 
With  regard  to  the  founding  of  what  mighl  be  called  a  polity 
or  state,  it  is  manifest  that  nothing  could  be  farther  from  hia 
intention.  "  His  kingdom,"  he  acquaints  us,  "  is  not  of  this 
world."  It  is  not  of  a  secular  nature,  to  be  either  propagated 
or  defended  by  the  arm  of  flesh,  or  to  have  its  laws  enforced  by 
human  sanctions,  or  any  such  temporal  punishments  as  merely 
human  authority  can  inflict. 

It  is  impossible  to  conceive  a  greater  contrast  between  the 
spirit  which  his  instructions  breathe,  and  that  spirit  of  pride 
and  domination,  which  not  many  centuries  afterwards  be- 
came the  predominant  spirit  of  what  then  came  to  be  denomi- 
nated the  church.  Again  and  again  did  Christ  admonish  his 
apostles,  and  other  followers,  to  live  as  brethren  and  equals, 
not  to  affect  a  superiority  over  their  fellow-disciples,  or  over 
one  another ;  inasmuch  as  in  this,  his  kingdom  would  differ  in 
its  fundamental  maxims  from  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  world : 
that  that  person  alone  would  there  be  deemed  the  greatest, 
whose  deportment  should  be  the  humblest,  and  he  alone  supe- 
riour,  who  should  prove  most  serviceable  to  the  rest.  As  to 
worldly  monarchies  or  commonwealths,  of  whatever  kind,  he 
taught  them  to  regard  it  as  their  duty,  to  submit  to  such  pow- 
ers as  providence  should  set  over  them  ;  cheerfully  paying  tri- 
bute, and  yielding  obedience  to  every  human  ordinance  and 
command  that  should  not  be  found  to  contradict  the  law  of 
God.  "  Render  to  Csesar,"  said  he,  "  the  things  which  are 
*'  Caesar's,  and  to  God  the  things  which  are  God's."  Far 
from  affecting  any  secular  power  himself,  he  refused  a  royalty 
of  this  sort,  when  the  people  would  have  conferred  it,  and 
would  not  take  upon  him  to  decide  in  a  matter  of  civil  right 
and  property,  though  desired.  "  Man,"  said  he  to  the  person 
who  applied  to  him,  '*  who  made  me  a  judge  or  a  divider  over 
**  you  ?"  Then  he  said  to  the  people,  *■''  take  heed  and  beware 
**  of  covetousness  :"-— supporting  his  admonition  as  usual  by 
an  affecting  parable.  It  was  the  end  of  his  institution  to  puri- 
fy the  heart,  and  his  lessons  were  ever  calculated  for  extirpat- 
ing the  seeds  of  evil  that  remained  there.  In  a  similar  man- 
ner, when  the  disciples  privately  contended  among  themselves 
who  should  be  greatest,  he  took  occasion  to  warn  them  against 
ambition.  Jesus  calling  to  him  a  child,  placed  him  in  the 
midst  of  them,  and  said,  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you  ;  unless  ye  b©' 
converted,"  quite  changed  in  your  notions  and  conceptions  of 
things,  "  and  become  as  children,  ye  shall  never  enter  the 
**  kingdom  of  heaven.  Whosoever,  therefore,  shall  become 
"  humble  as  this  child,  shall  be  the  greatest  there.""  The 
same  maxims  were  warmly  inculcated  by  his,  apostles ;  ami 

p. 


26,.  LECTURES  ON 

in  their  time,  under  the  happy  influence  of  their  instructions, 
generally  prevailed  among  christians. 

Now  indeed  was  formed  a  community  of  the  disciples  of 
Jesus,  which  was  called  his  church,  a  word  that  denotes  no 
more  than  society  or  assembly,  and  is  sometimes  used  in  the 
New  Testament  with  evident  analog)'  to  the  common  use,  to 
signify  the  whole  community  of  christians  considered  as  one 
body,  of  which  Christ  is  denominated  the  head,  and  some- 
times only  a  particular  congregation  of  christians.  In  this 
general  society,  founded  in  the  unity  of  their  faith,  their  hope, 
their  love,  cemented,  as  it  were,  by  a  communion  or  joint  par- 
ticipation, as  occasion  offered,  in  religious  offices,  in  adora- 
tion, in  baptism,  and  in  the  commemoration  of  the  sufferings 
of  their  l>ord,  preserved  by  a  most  friendly  intercourse,  and 
by  frequent  instructions,  admonitions,  reproofs  when  necessa- 
ry, and  even  by  the  exclusion  of  those  who  had  violated  such 
powerful  and  solemn  engagements  :  in  all  this,  I  say,  there  was 
nothing  that  interfered  with  the  temporal  powers.  They 
claimed  no  jurisdiction  over  the  person,  the  liberty,  or  the  pro- 
perty of  any  man.  And  if  they  expelled  out  of  their  own  so- 
ciety, and,  on  satisfying  their  conditions,  re-admitted  those 
who  had  been  expelled,  they  did  in  this  only  exercise  a  right, 
which  (if  we  may  compare  great  things  with  small,  and  hea- 
venly things  with  earthly)  any  private  company,  like  a  knot  of 
artists  or  philosophers,  may  freely  exercise  ;  namely,  to  give 
the  benefit  of  their  own  company  and  conversation  to  whom, 
and  on  what  terms,  they  judge  proper  :  a  right  which  can  never 
justly  be  considered  as  in  the  least  infringing  on  the  secular 
powers.  The  christians  everywhere  acknowledged  themselves 
the  subjects  of  the  state,  whether  monarchical  or  republican,  ab- 
solute or  free,  under  which  they  lived  ;  entitled  to  the  same 
privileges  with  their  fellow-subjects,  and  bound  as  much  as 
any  of  them  (I  might  say  more,  in  respect  of  the  peculiar  ob- 
ligation which  their  religion  laid  them  under)  to  the  observance 
of  the  laws  of  their  country.  They  pleaded  no  exemption  but 
in  one  case  ;  a  case  wherein  every  man,  though  not  a  christian, 
has  a  natural  title  to  exemption  ;  that  is,  not  to  obey  a  law 
which  is  unjust  in  itself,  and  which  he  is  persuaded  in  hisr  con- 
science to  be  so.  But  in  regard  to  rights  merely  of  a  person- 
al or  private  nature,  over  which  the  individual  has  a  greater 
power,  far  from  being  pertinacious  asserters  of  these,  they 
held  it  for  an  invariable  maxim,  that  it  is  much  better  to  suffer 
wrong,  than  either  to  commit  or  to  avenge  it.  This,  in  my 
judgment,  is  the  true  footing  on  which  the  apostolical  church 
stood  in  relation  to  the  secular  powers.  To  what  causes  the 
wonderful  change  afterwards  produced,  ought  to  be  attributed^, 
I  intend  to  make  the  subject  of  another  prelection. 


ECCLESIASTIGAL  HISTORY.  27 


LECTURE  IIL 


I 


CONCLUDED  the  last  discourse  I  gave  you  on  the  subjisct 
of  Sacred  History,  with  an  account  of  the  origin  and  primitive 
nature  of  the  christian  church.  I  observed  to  you,  that  being 
founded  in  the  concurrence  of  its  members  in  the  faith  of  the 
doctrine,  and  the  observance  of  the  precepts  of  Christ  their 
common  Lord,  and  being  supported  by  brotherly  affection  one 
to  anothet,  as  well  as  ardent  zeal  for  the  happiness  of  the  whble, 
it  was  in  no  respect  calculated  to  interfere  with  the  rights  of 
princes,  or  afford  matter  of  umbrage  or  jealousy  tb  the  Secular 
pibwers.  But  what  God  makes  upright,  man  always  corrupts  by 
his  inventions.  This  was  the  case  of  the  human  species  itself. 
This  was  the  case  of  the  first  religion,  call  it  traditional,  or 
call  it  natural,  which,  in  process  of  time,  did,  in  the  different 
nations  of  the  earth,  degenerate  into  the  grossest  idolatry  and 
abominations.  Atid  as  to  what  has  been  communicated  since 
by  written  revelation,  this  Was  certainly  the  case  of  the  preced- 
ing or  Mosaical  institution.  And  this,  upon  inquiry,  will  be 
found  to  have  been  eminently  the  case  of  the  pres&nt  or  chris- 
tian dispensation. 

When  the  disciples  in  populous  cities  begaii  tb  multiply,  as 
no  association  of  imperfect  creatures  will  ever  be  found,  in 
all  respects,  perfect,  it  is  by  no  means  strange,  that  sometimes 
differences  and  interferings  should  arise  between  individuals 
concerning  matters  of  property  and  civil  right.  These  dif- 
ferences Occasioned  law-suits  before  the  ordinary  judgfes  who 
were  pagans.  Law-suits,  a^  might  be  expected,  not  only  occa- 
sioned, to  the  great  prejudice  of  charity,  heart-burnings  among 
themselves,  but  tended  tO  bring  a  scandal  on  the  profession, 
whose  criterion  or  badge  had  been  expressly  declared  by  their 
master  to  be  their  mutual  love.  Examples  there  were  of  these 
mischiefs  as  early  as  the  times  of  the  apostles,  particularly  at 
Corinth^  a  city  abounding  in  wealth  and  luxury.  The  apostle 
Paul,  effectually  to  remedy  this  evil,  and  to  prevent  the  scandal 
and  hurt  which  must  arise  from  its  continuance,  first  expostu- 
lates with   the  Corinthians  (J  Cor.  vi.  1,  &t.)  on  the  nature 


28  LECTURES  ON 

and  dignity  of  their  christian  vocation,  to  which  it  would  be 
much  more  suitable  patiently  to  suffer  injuries,  than,  with  so 
imminent  a  risk  of  charity,  to  endeavour  to  obtain  redress  : — ■" 
''  Why  do  ye  not  rather,*'  says  he,  "  take  wrong  ?  Why  do  ye 
"  not  rather  suffer  yourselves  to  be  defrauded  ?"  And  even 
should  the  injury  appear  too  great  to  be  entirely  overlooked, 
he  enjoins  them,  and  with  them  doubtless  all  christians  in  the 
like  circumstances,  to  submit  those  differences,  which  should 
unhappily  arise  among  them,  to  arbitrators  chosen  from  among 
themselves.  By  this  expedient  a  double  end  would  be  an- 
swered :  the  parties  would,  by  the  mediation  of  their  brethren, 
be  more  easily  conciliated  to  each  other,  and  the  reproach  of 
the  heathen  would  be  prevented.  It  is  evident  that  in  this 
there  was  no  encroachment  on  the  province  of  the  magistrate. 
A  similar  practice,  ever  since  the  Babylonish  captivity,  had 
obtained  among  the  Jews  in  all  the  countries  through  which 
they  were  dispersed.  To  put  an  end  to  differences,  either  by 
compromise  or  by  arbitration,  is  the  exercise  of  a  natural 
right,  which  all  civil  establishments  acknowledge,  and  which 
most  of  them  show  a  disposition  to  encourage  and  promote. 
Jars  and  quarrels  are  universally  admitted  to  be  evils,  though 
unavoidable  in  the  present  lapsed  condition  of  human  nature. 
Judicatories  are  erected  to  put  an  end  betimes  to  these  evils. 
The  litigation  of  the  parties,  though  a  bad  consequence,  is 
permitted  solely  to  prevent  a  worse.  But  no  human  polity 
commands  men  to  be  litigious.  The  less  a  man  is  so,  he  is 
the  better  subject  of  the  state.  The  apostle's  aim  is  to  crush 
strife  as  early  as  possible,  and  to  prevent  an  ill  effect,  though 
not  the  worst  effect,  of  private  differences  ;  to  wit,  publick  con- 
tention in  courts  of  law.  His  advice  is  such  as  every  good 
man,  every  lover  of  peace,  and  therefore  every  good  citizen, 
would  very  readily  give  to  the  members  of  any  society  in 
which  he  had  a  concern.  It  was,  besides,  perfectly  suitable  to 
the  peaceful  maxims  of  his  great  master :  "  Resist  not  evil. 
*'  Agree  with  thine  adversary  quickly  whilst  thou  art  in  the 
"  way  with  him."  And  "  Blessed  are  the  peace-makers,  for 
*'  they  shall  be  called  the  children  of  God." 

Let  it  be  remarked  further,  that  those  primitive  and  chosen 
arbiters  claimed  no  coercive  power  of  any  kind  over  their  fel- 
low-christians.  The  judgment  they  pronounced  was  very 
properly  termed,  in  primitive  times,  the  judgment  of  charity 
or  love.  By  this  principle  alone  were  the  judges  influenced 
(without  salary  or  emoluments)  to  undertake  the  office  :  by  this 
principle  alone  were  the  parties  disposed  to  submit  to  the  sen- 
tence :  and  by  this  principle  alone,  where  an  injury  had  been 
committed,  the  offender  was  induced,  as  far  as  possible,  to 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  S9 

make  reparation,  and  the  oflFended  as  readily  to  grant  forgive- 
ness. No  mention  do  we  find  of  bailiffs  or  tipstaves,  fines, 
imprisonments,  or  distraining  of  goods.  As  their  principal 
view  in  examining  and  deciding  such  questions  was  the  radi- 
cal cure  of  the  evil,  that  is,  of  every  thing  that  might  look 
like  animosity  or  discontent  among  the  disciples  of  Christ  f 
they  neither  had,  nor  desired  to  have  any  other  means  of  en- 
forcing their  decisions,  than  such  as  the  love  of  peace  and 
union,  and  the  interest  of  the  common  cause  necessarily  gave 
them.  To  have  applied,  as  umpires  in  christian  states  are 
wont,  for  the  interposition  of  the  secular  arm  to  enforce  their 
decrees,  would  have  been  recurring  to  that  very  evil,  for  the 
prevention  of  which  they  had  been  nominated  as  judges  by 
their  brethren. 

It  deserves  also  to  be  taken  notice  of,  that  ttie  apostle,  fit 
from  taking  upon  him  to  assign  this  office  of  terminating 
their  diiferences  to  such  as  he  might  think  properly  qualified, 
does  not  so  much  as  recommend,  or  even  mention  to  them  any 
individual,  or  any  class  of  men.  On  the  contrary,  he  leaves 
the  matter  entirely  to  their  own  free  choice.  And  indeed  it 
was  proper  it  should  be  so.  This  expedient  is  recommended 
purely  from  the  charitable  and  prudential  considerations  of 
decency  and  peace.  These  could  not  be  promoted  otherwise 
than  by  the  people's  perfect  confidence,  not  only  in  the  equity 
but  in  the  abilities  of  the  persons  to  be  intrusted,  who  there- 
fore doubtless  ought  to  be  of  their  electing.  Besides,  it  would 
have  ill  suited  the  genuine  but  spiritual  dignity  of  the  aposto- 
lick  office,  for  Paul,  so  unlike  the  examples  given  by  his  Lord, 
to  have  assumed  an  authoritative  direction  in  matters  merelv 
temporal.  For  this  reason  I  am  inclined  to  think  that,  if  he 
had  judged  it  necessary  to  oflFer  his  opinion  as  to  the  particular 
persons  proper  to  be  chosen,  he  would  have  judged  it  fitter  to 
exempt  the  pastors  from  a  charge  which  might,  in  some  re- 
spects, appear  foreign  from  their  office,  than  to  recommend 
them  to  it. 

The  consequence  however  in  fact  was,  that  at  least  in  several 
congregations  or  churches,  the  choice  fell  upon  their  ministers, 
a  very  natural  effect  of  that  confidence  and  respect  which,  in 
those  times  of  purity,  we  have  ground  to  believe  they  merit- 
ed. Nor  let  it  be  imagined,  from  any  thing  advanced  above, 
that  this  was  a  charge  which  the  ministers  of  religion,  as 
things  then  stood,  ought  to  have  declined.  1  have  indeed 
acknowledged,  that,  in  some  respects,  the  cognizance  of  secu- 
lar matters  did  not  so  naturally  unite  with  their  spiritual  func- 
tions. But,  consider  the  affair  in  another  view,  and  we  shall 
find  that  both  in  regard  to  the  motive  which  influenced  them, 


30  LECTURES  ON 

and  the  end  which  their  acceptance  of  this  task  tended  to  pfd- 
mote,  there  was  a  real  suitableness  to  the  nature  and  design 
of  their  office.  Hardly  could  ambition  be  supposed  to  ope- 
rate in  inducing  them  to  accept  a  charge  which  added  to  their 
labour,  and  exposed  them  the  more  to  the  notice  of  the  com- 
mon enemy,  and  consequently  to  danger,  without  adding  to 
their  wealth,  or  rank,  or  even  power  in  the  common  accepta- 
tion of  the  term.  For  the  award  of  these  judges  was  nd  more 
than  the  declaration  of  their  opinion  ;  and  the  execution  of  the 
sentence  was  no  more  than  the  voluntary  acquiescence  of  the 
parties.  The  pastors  derived  no  kind  of  authority  from  this 
prerogative,  except  that  which  integrity  and  discernment  inva- 
riably secure  with  those  for  whose  benefit  these  talents  are 
exerted.  An  authority  this  which  depends  entirely  on  the 
right  discharge  of  the  trust,  and  is  incompatible  with  the 
abuse  of  it.  Their  motive  therefore  could  only  be  the  chari- 
table desire  of  making  peace  and  preventing  offences.  The 
harmony  of  christians  among  themselves,  and  their  unblem- 
ished reputation  in  respect  of  the  heathen,  were  no  less 
manifestly  the  blessed  ends  to  which  their  labour  of  love  con- 
tributed. 

But  might  it  not  be  urged,  on  the  other  hand,  that  this  work 
would  infallibly  prove  an  avocation  frorii  the  spiritual  and  more 
important  duties  of  their  office  ?  In  those  early  ages,  before 
the  love  of  many  had  waxed  cold,  before  the  christian  congre- 
gations were  become  either  so  numerous  or  so  opulent,  as 
some  time  afterwards  they  became,  it  is  not  to  be  imagined 
that  such  questions,  in  relation  to  property  and  civil  rights, 
would  be  either  so  frequent,  or  so  intricate,  as  to  occupy  a  con- 
siderable portion  of  the  arbitrator's  time,  and  thereby  inter- 
fere with  his  other  more  essential  duties.  Had  it  been  other- 
wise, this  judiciary  charge  ought  doubtless,  from  the  beginning, 
to  have  been  devolved  into  other  hands.  The  apostles  them- 
selves, we  find,  at  first  took  the  trouble  of  distributing  to  the 
people,  according  to  the  respective  necessities  of  each,  the 
money  which  the  charity  and  zeal  of  the  converts  had  thrown 
into  the  common  stock.  But  when  this  work  became  so  bur- 
densome, as  to  interfere  with  the  peculiar  functions  of  the 
apostleship,  they  made  no  delay  in  resigning  it  to  others. 
"  It  is  not  reason,"  said  they,  "  that  we  should  leave  the  word 
"  of  God,  and  serve  tables."  The  like  part  no  doubt  ought 
those  primitive  pastors  to  have  acted ;  the  like  part  no  doubt 
they  would  have  acted,  had  there  been  the  like  occasion. 
That  they  did  not,  ought  to  be  accounted  bv  us  as  sufficient- 
evidence  that  the  like  occasion  did  not  exist,  and  that  the  task 
was  then  no  way  cumbersome.     They  had  apostolical  example 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  SI 

alike  for  undertaking  an  office  of  benevolence,  when  it  did  not 
interfere,  and  for  renouncing  it  when  it  did  interfere,,wixh  the 
sacred  duties  of  their  spiritual  function. 

But  to  return,  this  custom  of  nominating  their  pastors  to  he 
arbitrators  of  all  their  differences  in  matters  of  civil  property 
and  right,  from  being  pretty  common,  seems  very  quickly  to 
have  become  general.  The  example  of  one  christian  society 
influenced  another,  who  did  not  choose  to  appear  deficient  in 
any  testimony  of  esteem  for  their  teachers.  From  being  ge- 
neral it  became  universal.  Every  congregation  would  think 
it  proper  to  avoid  distinguishing  themselves  by  a  singularity, 
which  would  be  understood  to  reflect  either  on  the  judgment 
©r  the  discretion  of  their  pastors. 

Some  learned  men  seem  to  be  of  opinion,  that  the  business 
of  determining  such  civil  controversies  as  arose  between  chris- 
tians, belonged  at  first  to  the  whole  congregation  ;  or,  in  other 
words,  to  that  particular  church  or  society  whereof  the  parties 
concerned  were  members.  But  this  mistake  appears  to  have 
arisen  from  confounding  two  things  totally  distinct.  When 
one  christian  had  ground,  real  or  supposed,  to  complain  of  the 
conduct  of  another  as  unbrotherly  and  injurious,  after  private 
methods  of  reclaiming  the  offender  had  been  tried  in  vain  by 
the  offended,  it  belonged  to  the  congregation  to  judge  between 
them  ;  and  either  to  effect  a  reconciliation,  or  to  discard  dhe 
who,  by  his  obstinacy  in  the  wrong,  showed  himself  unworthy 
of  their  fellowship.  This  method  had  been  clearly  pointed 
out  to  them  by  their  great  founder.  *•'■  If  thy  broiher,"  says 
he,  "trespass  against  thee,  go  and  tell  him  his  fault,  between 
*'  thee  and  him  alone  :  if  he  hear  thee,  thou  hast  gained  thy 
"  brother  ;  but  if  he  will  not  hear  thee,  then  take  widi  thee  one 
"  or  two  more,  that  in  the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses 
.*'  every  word  may  be  established ;  and  if  he  neglect  to  hear 
*'  them,  tell  it  to  the  church ;  but  if  he  neglect  to  hear  the 
*' church,  let  him  be  to  thee  as  a  heathen  and  a  publican, 
"  Verily  I  say  unto  you.  Whatsoever  ye  shall  bind  on  earth, 
**  shall  be  bound  in  heaven  ;  and  whatsoever  ye  shall  loose  on 
*'  earth,  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven."  What  ye  thus  do,  agree- 
ably  to  the  instructions  I  give  you,  God  himself  will  ratify. 
The  practice  of  the  apostolick  age,  which  has  the  best  title  to 
the  denomination  of  primitive,  is  the  surest  commentary  on 
this  precept  of  our  Lord.  Not  only  were  such  private  of- 
fences then  judged  by  the  chuirch,  that  is,  the  congregation, 
but  also  those  scandals  which  affected  the  whole  christian  fra- 
ternity. Accordingly,  the  judgment  which  Paul,  by  the  spirit 
©f  God,  had  formed  concerning  the  incestuous  person,  he  en- 
joins the  church,  to  whom  his  epistle  is  directed,  that  is,  (te 


^2  LECTURES  ON 

use  his  own  words  for  an  explanation)  '*  them  who  at  Corinth 
*'  are  sanctified  in  Christ  Jesus,  called  to  be  saints,  to  pronounce 
"  and  execute."  And  in  his  second  epistle  to  the  same 
church,  (chap.  ii.  v.  6.)  he  says,  in  reference  to  the  same  delin- 
quent, "  Sufficient  to  such  a  man  is  the  censure  which  was 
*'  inflicted  by  many  ;"  Cno  t«v  5rx«/evw,  by  the  community.  And 
(v.  10.)  "To  whom  ye  forgave  any  thing,"  addressing  him- 
self always  to  the  congregation,  "  I  forgive  also."  We  admit, 
with  the  learned  Dodwell^,  that  in  the  censure  inflicted  on  the 
incestuous  person,  the  christians  at  Corinth  were  but  the  exe- 
cutors of  the  doom  avirarded  by  the  apostle.  Nor  does  any 
one  question  the  apostolical  authority  in  such  matters  over  both 
the  flock  and  the  pastors.  But  from  the  words  last  quoted,  it 
is  evident  that  he  acknovvrledges,  at  the  same  time,  the  ordi- 
nary power  in  regard  to  discipline  lodged  in  the  congrega- 
tion ;  and  from  the  confidence  he  had  in  the  discretion  and 
integrity  of  the  Corinthians,  he  promises  his  concurrence  in 
what  they  shall  judge  proper  to  do.  "  To  whom  ye  forgive 
*■'•  any  thing,  I  forgive  also."  Now,  though  in  aftertimes  the 
charge  of  this  matter  also  came  to  be  devolved,  first  on  the 
bishop  and  presbyters,  and  afterwards  solely  on  the  bishop,  yet 
that  the  people,  as  well  as  the  presbyters,  as  far  down,  at  least, 
as  to  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  retained  some  share  in 
thfc  decision  of  questions  wherein  morals  were  immediately 
concerned,  is  manifest  from  Cyprian's  letters  still  extant.  In 
his  time,  when  congregations  were  become  very  numerous,  the 
inquiry  and  deliberation  were  holden  (perhaps  then  more  com- 
modiously)  in  the  ecclesiastical  college,  called  the  presbytery, 
consisting  of  the  bishop,  the  presbyters,  and  the  deacons. 
When  this  was  over,  the  result  of  their  inquiry  and  consulta- 
tions was  reported  to  the  whole  congregation  belonging  to  that 
church,  who  were  called  together  on  purpose,  in  order  to  ob- 
tain their  approbation  of  what  had  been  done,  and  their  con- 
sent to  the  resolution  that  had  been  taken:  for  without  their 
consent,  no  judgment  could  regularly  be  put  in  execution. 

But  this  is  quite  a  different  subject  of  inquiry  from  ques-. 
tions  merely  in  regard  to  right  or  property.  The  one  is  more 
analogous  to  a  criminal,  the  other  to  a  civil  process.  Two 
persons  may  differ  in  regard  to  the  title  to  a  particular  subject, 
each  claiming  it  as  his,  though  neither  accuse  the  other  of  inju- 
rious, or  unchristian  treatment ;  it  is  not  because  these  pleas 
always  spring  from  some  malignity  of  disposition,  that  this 
amicable  method  of  terminating  them  is  recommended ;  but 
it  is  because  there  is  an  imminent  hazard,  that  if  long  conti^ 

*  De  jure  Laicoram  sacerdotali,  c.  iii.  §  10. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  33 

nued,  and  brought  to  publick  view,  they  breed  some  maUg'^iJ^y 
in  the  minds  of  the  parties  towards  each  other,  and  affr,^i-^  ^ 
handle  to  idolaters  to  blaspheme  the  good  ways  of  the  Lord. 
Now  it  is  manifest,  in  the  first  place,  that  questions  of  civil 
right  are  not  so  much  within  tlie  sphere  of  the  m.oltitude,  as 
those  which  concern  practical  religion  rend  morals;  and  se- 
condly, that  the  apostle  does  not  recommend  it  to  the  peorjle  to 
take  such  secular  matters  under  their  own  cognizancv*.  collec- 
tively, but  only  to  appoinc  proper  persons  to  judge  in  them. 
"  If  then,"  says  he,  "  ye  have  judgment  of  things  pertaining 
"  to  this  life,  set  them  to  judge  who  are  least  esteemed  in  the 
*'  church."  In  the  epithet  least  esteemed^  I  imapi^'me  he  couches 
an  ironical  reproof  to  the  Cor5,nthians,  for  their  appearing  to 
be  at  a  loss  in  finding  persons  proper  to  discuss  matters  in 
themselves  of  very  little  moment  compared  with  those  with 
which,  as  christians,  they  were  conversant.  But  to  guard 
against  being  mistaken  by  too  literal  an  interpretation  of  his 
words,  he  immediaiely  subjoins,  '•■'•  \  speak  this  to  shame  you. 
"  Is  it  so,  that  there  is  not  a  wise  man  amongst  you  ?  No,  not 
«'  one,  that  shall  be  able  to  judge  between  his  brethren  ?"  So 
that  it  appears  extremely  probable,  that  unless  what  was  first 
only  a  ciyil, controversy,  afterwards  became  a  scandal,  by  the 
improper  behaviour  of  one  or  both  of  the  litigants,  the  people 
did  not  intermeddle  in  the  cause.  They  left  it  entirely  to  the 
arbiters,  or  wise  men,  whom  they  had  nominated  for  the  pur- 
pose :  and  these,  as  was  observed  before,  came  at  last  univer- 
sally to  be  the  pastors. 

Time,  the  greatest  of  all  innovators,  though,  when  it  ope- 
rates by  slow  degrees,  the  least  observable ;  (time,  1  say) 
which  alters  every  thing,  did,  from  the  universality  of  the 
practice  of  committing  this  trust  to,  the  pastors,  and  from  its 
continuance  for  a  course  of  successions  in  their  hands,  at 
length,  in  eiFect,  establish  it  as  a  right.  As  charity  cooled^ 
ambition,  a  very  subtle  passion,  insensibly  insinuated  itself. 
This  it  would  do  at  first  more  modestly  under  the  guise  of 
publick  virtue,  as  a  desire  of  being  more  extensively  useful  to 
the  people,  afterwards  more  boldly,  as  a  commendable  zeal 
for  every  thing  that  could  be  deemed  a  prerogative  of  the 
sacred  order.  When  persecutions  had  ceased,  the  churches, 
as  they  grew  in  the  number  and  the  wealth  of  their  members, 
produced,  in  proportion,  more  fruits  of  contention,  and  fewer 
of  brotherly  love.  Every  thing,  then,  that  might  give  any 
sort  of  ascendancy  over  the  minds  of  others,  would  be 
greedily  grasped  at :  and  this  privilege  of  judging,  in  civil 
matters,  would  then  be  very  naturally  claimed  by  the  bishops, 
as  a  part  of  their  office.     It  must,  howeyej-,  be  acknowled^-ed^ 


$4,  LECTURES  ON 

that  though,  in  particular  instances,  this  trust  might  be  abused.;^ 
it  was,  upon  the  whole,  expedient  for  the  christian  brotherhood^ 
and  could  scarcely  be  considered  as  dangerous  so  long  as  it  re- 
mained on  the  original  footing,  and  was  unsupported  by  the  se^ 
cular  arm. 

But  when  Christianity  came  to  receive  the  countenance  and 
sanction  of  the  ruling  powers,  the  Roman  emperours  imagined 
they  could  not  n^ore  effectually  show  their  zeal  for  the  cause  of 
Christ,  tlian  by  confirming  every  prerogative  which  had  been 
considered  as  belonging  to  his  ministers.  It  is,  besides  not 
unlikely,  that  the  happy  influence  which  the  pastoral  decisions, 
aided  by  the  authority  of  religion,  generally  had  in  composing 
differences  among  the  people,  would  prove  an  additional  mo= 
live  for  their  interposition  in  support  of  a  practice  seemingly 
so  conducive  to  publick  utility.  But  whatever  be  in  this,  so  it 
was,  that  the  bishop's  power  of  judging,  in  secular  matters, 
was  not  only  ratified  by  law,  but  through  an  ill-judged  induU 
gence,  as  soon  appeared  by  the  event,  was  further  extended, 
backed  by  the  secular  arm,  and  rendered  compulsory.  Con- 
stantine,  the  first  christian  emperour,  made  a  law,  that  the 
sentence  of  the  bishop  should,  in  every  case,  be  final,  and  that 
the  magistrate  should  be  obliged  to  execute  it ;  that  if  in  any 
cause  depending  before  the  secular  judge,  in  any  stage  of  the 
process,  either  party,  though  in  direct  opposition  to  the  other 
party,  should  appeal  to  the  bishop  ;  to  his  tribunal,  from  which 
there  could  be  no  appea.1,  the  cause  should  instantly  be  re-, 
jnitted. 

Then,  indeed,  began  the  episcopal  judgment  to  be  properly 
forensick,  having  compulsive  execution  by  the  ministry  of  the 
magistrate.  Then,  indeed,  began  the  prelates,  for  the  greater 
state  and  dignity,  in  their  judicial  proceedings,  to  adopt  the 
model  and  appendages  of  civil  judicatories,  and  to  have  their 
chancellors,  commissaries,  officials,  advocates,  proctors,  regisv 
ters,  apparitors,  &:c.  &c.  Then  originated  these  phrases  un= 
heard  before,  episcopal  jurisdiction^  episcopal  audience^  and  other 
such  like.  When  one  considers  the  origin  of  ecclesiastical 
judicature,  as  deduced  above,  and  the  reasons  for  which  some 
expedient  of  this  sort  was  first  recommended  by  Paul  to  the 
Corinthians,  it  is  impossible  to  conceive  any  thing  more  un- 
suitable to  his  design,  than  the  footing  on  v/hich  it  was  now  es- 
tablished. One  principal  ground  for  which  the  apostle  advis- 
ed the  measure,  was  to  avoid  the  scandal  which  one  christian 
suing  another  before  a  tribunal  of  infidels,  must  necessarily 
bring  upon  their  religion.  '•'•  Brother,"  says  he,  "  goeth  to 
"  law  with  brother,  and  that  before  the  unbelievers."  Now 
this  evil  was  radically  cured  when  Christianity  became  the  es« 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  2S 

tablisbed  religion,  and  the  secular  judges  themselves  were 
taken  from  the  christian  brotherhood.  I  acknowledge,  how- 
ever, that  this  is  not  the  only  ground  of  the  apostle's  recom- 
mendation :  his  other  reason  is,  thiat  to  prevent  law-suits  en- 
tirely, by  a  compi-omise  of  any  differences  that  might  arise,  or 
by  a  friendly  reference  to  proper  urinpires,  Would  be  greatly 
conducive  to  the  cause  of  charity,  which  is  the  common  cause, 
by  preserving  peiace  among  themselves  :  but  no  sooner  is  the 
bishop,  or  indeed  any  man,  vested  with  legal  and  coercive  au- 
thority, ii>6omuch  that  people  cari  be  comjiellecl  to  appear  be- 
fore him,  and  to  submit  to  his  sentence,  than  he  ceases  to  be 
.  an  umpire,  his  court  is  erected  into  a  secular  tribunal,  and  the 
procedure  before  him  is  as  really  a  law-suit  as  that  which  is 
carried  on  before  any  other  judge.  All  the  weight,  therefore, 
of  the  apostle's  second  reason  from  fraternal  love,  operates  as 
strongly  against  suing  an  advei^sary  in  this  coiirt,  as  it  doe^ 
against  suing  him  in  any  other. 

It  was  not  at  first  understood,  or  duly  attetided  to,  how  great 
the  chaiige  was,  which  this  new  arrangement  of  Constantine  made 
in  the  constitution  of  the  empire.  It\vas,  in  effect,  throwing  the 
whole  judiciaiy  power  of  the  state  into  the  Hands  of  the  clergy. 
All  the  ordinary  judicatories  were  how  reduced  to  act  solely 
in  subordination  to  the  spiritual  courts,  which  could  overrule 
the  proceedings  of  the  secular,  whilst  their  own  were  not  lia- 
ble to  be  overruled  by  any.  The  civil  magistrate  who. might 
fee  compielled  to  eiecute  their  sentences,  but  was  not  entitled 
to  revise  or  altei-  them,  was,  in  fact,  no  better  than  the  bishop's 
sergeant.  His  office,  in  this  instance,  was  by  iio  means  magis« 
terial,  it  was  merely  mifaisterial  and  subservient. 

It  was  in  vain,  at  the  period  at  which  we  are  now  arrived, 
to  imagine,  that  in  the  same  way  as  formerly,  a  sense  of  reli- 
gion should  operate  on  the  minds  of  the  people.  This  is  a 
sentiment  of  too  delicate  a  nature  to  be  rendered  compatible 
with  the  measures  now  adopted.  Froth  the  moment  the  pas- 
tor was  armed  with  the  ttrrdurs  of  the  magistrate,  the  powei' 
of  religion  was  superseded,  atid  the  gentlfe  voice  of  love  was 
drowned  in  the  clamour  of  commitmetits,  forfeitures,  and  dis- 
tress of  goods.  It  deserves  also  to  be  remarked,  that  whilst 
matters  remained  on  the  primitive  footing,  thet-e  was  the 
strongest  tie  on  the  pastors  to  a  strict  observance  of  equity,  as 
It  was  theiice  only  that  their  judgments  could  derive  authority, 
br  command  respect.  .  The  po^ver  itself  was  of  such  a  nature, 
as  could  not  long  subsist  after  beirig  perverted  :  the  case  was 
quite  different  now.  It  appeared  of  little  consequence  to  draw 
respect  to  a  verdict,  to  which  they  could  enforce  obedience  : 
"iud  this  could  equally  be  effected,  whatever  were  the  sentence^ 


36  LECTURES  ON 

just  or  unjust,  reasonable  or  absurd.  Of  the  like  pernicious 
tendency,  as  they  flowed  from  the  same  cause,  were  the  mea- 
sures  that  were  afterwards  adopted  to  enforce  ecclesiastical 
censures  and  excommunications,  by  the  sanction  of  civil  laws, 
inflicting  pains  and  penalties.  When  so  much  depended  on  the 
dignitaries  of  the  church,  they  could  not  fail  to  meet  with  all 
the  adulation,  and  other  seductive  arts,  by  which  the  favour  of 
the  great  and  powerful  is,  through  the  influence  of  avarice,  and 
other  irregular  desires,  commonly  courted  by  inferiours  and 
dependents.  Whether  this  would  contribute  to  improve  these 
shepherds  of  the  flock  in  humility  and  meekness,  may  be  sub- 
mitted tathe  determination  of  every  impartial  and  judicious 
hearer.  One  favourable  circumstance,  however,  which  per- 
haps inclined  the  people  more  easily  to  acquiesce  in  it,  was, 
that  it  was  the  only  considerable  check  which  they  had,  for 
ages,  on  the  too  absolute  power  of  the  emperour.  It  is  thus 
that  Providence,  in  the  worst  of  circumstances,  is  ever  at  work, 
bringing  good  out  of  evil,  making  usurpations  on  diff'erent 
sides  balance  and  control  one  another,  and  rendering  the 
greatest  calamities  reciprocal  correctives. 

But  to  proceed  in  our  narration  ;  the  emperour  Valens  still 
enlarged  the  jurisdiction  of  the  bishops,  assigning  to  them  the 
charge  of  fixing  the  prices  of  all  vendible  commodities,  which 
was,  it  must  be  owned,  a  most  extraordinary  assignment.  It  is 
but  doing  justice  to  some  worthy  bishops  to  declare,  that  far 
from  being  gratified  by  these  changes,  they  loudly  complained 
of  them.  Possidonius  relates  concerning  Augustine  in  parti- 
cular, that  though  he  gave  attendance  to  this  forensick  busi- 
ness all  the  morning,  sometimes  till  dinner-time,  and  some- 
times till  night,  he  was  wont  to  say,  that  it  was  a  great  griev- 
ance to  him,  as  it  diverted  his  attention  from  what  was  much 
more  properly  his  charge  ;  that  it  was,  in  fact,  to  leave  things 
useful,  and  to  attend  to  things  tumultuous  and  perplexed;  that 
saint  Paul  had  not  assumed  this  ofiice  to  himself,  well  knowing 
how  unsuitable  it  was  to  that  of  a  preacher  of  the  Gospel,  but 
was  desirous  that  it  should  be  given  to  others.  Such  were  the 
sentiments  of  that  respectable  father  of  the  church.  But  ev.ery 
bishop  was  not  of  the  same  mind  with  Augustine. 

About  seventy  years  afterwards,  when  this  authority  came 
to  be  very  much  abused,  the  law  of  Constantine  was  repealed 
by  Arcadius  and  Honorius,  who  limited  the  bishops,  in  civil 
matters  to  those  only  which  were  referred  to  their  judgment  by 
the  consent  of  both  the  litigants.  But  in  some  cities  the  bishops 
were  already  become  too  powerful,  and  too  rich,  to  be  so 
easily  dispossessed.  In  Rome  particularly,  this  new  regula- 
tion had  little  or  no  effect,  till  Valentianus,  about  the  middle 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  Sir 

of  the  fifth  century,  being'himself  in  Rome,  renewed  it,  and 
caused  it  to  be  put  in  execution.  However,  it  was  soon  after- 
wards revoked  by  subsequent  princes,  who  restored  to  the 
clergy  a  great  part  of  that  jurisdiction  which  had  been  taken 
away.  Justinian  in  particular  established  the  episcopal  tribu- 
nal, allotting  to  it,  in  the  first  place,  all  causes  that  could  be  any 
way  understood  to  concern  religion,  then  the  ecclesiastical  de- 
linquencies of  clergymen,  and  also  diverse  sorts  of  voluntary 
jurisdiction  over  the  laity.  By  the  methods  above  recited,  it 
happened,  we  find  at  last,  that  the  brotherly  corrections,  and 
charitable  interpositions,  instituted  by  Christ  and  his  apostles, 
degenerated  into  mere  worldly  domination.  When,  on  the  one 
hand,  the  ministers  of  religion  thought  fit  to  exchange  that  pa- 
rental tenderness,  w^hich  was  the  glory  of  their  predecessors, 
for  that  lordly  superiority  which  succeeded,  it  was  a  natural  con- 
sequence, that,  on  the  other  hand,  the  amiable  reverence 
of  the  child  should  be  overwhelmed  in  the  fearful  submission 
of  the  slave.  "  Perfect  love,"  says  the  apostle  John,  "  casteth 
out  fear."  It  is  no  less  true  in  the  converse.  "  Perfect  fear 
casteth  out  love."  The  great  engine  of  the  magistrate,  is  ter- 
rour  J  of  the  pastor,  love.  The  advancement  of  the  one  is 
the  destruction  of  the  other.  To  attempt  to  combine  them 
in  the  same  character,  is  to  attempt  to  forna  a  hideous  monster 
at  the  best.  Paul  understood  the  difference,  and  marked  it 
well  in  his  epistles,  especially  those  to  Timothy  and  to  Titus* 
**  The  servant  of  the  Lord,"  says  he,  "  must  not  strive,  but  be 
"  gentle  to  all  men,  apt  to  teach,  patient  and  meek,  not  greedy 
"  of  sordid  lucre,  no  striker."  The  weapons  of  his  warfare  are 
not  carnal;  he  forbears  threatening,  and  does  not  employ  the  arm 
of  flesh  :  his  weapons  are  the  soft  powers  of  persuasion,  anJ* 
mated  by  tenderness  and  love.  In  vain  is  it  pretended,  that 
the  ecclesiastical  jCirisdiction,  above  explained,  is  not  of  the 
nature  of  dominion,  like  the  secular.  Where  is  the  difference 
that  can  be  called  material  ?  Is  not  the  execution,  wherever 
there  is  either  opposition  or  delay  on  the  part  of  him  who  is 
cast  effected  ultimately  by  the  same  methods  of  coercion,  im- 
prisonment, distraining  of  goods,  and  the  like  as  in  the  tempo- 
ral judicatories  ?  Are  not  the  parties  loaded  with  expenses  to 
the  full  as  heavy  ?  Or  are  there  not  as  many  hungry  vultures, 
retainers  to  the  court,  that  must  be  satisfied  ?  Is  there  not  the 
same  scope  for  contention,  altercation,  and  chicane  ?  Or  ate 
the  processes  in  the  spiritual  courts  (where  such  spiritual  courts 
still  subsist)  less  productive  of  feuds  and  animosities  than  in 
the  secular  ? 

In  almost  all  cases  wherein  a  particular  mode  of  religion  has 
obtained,  in  a  country,  a  legal  establishment,  in  preference  to 
every  other  mode,  there  has  been  a  strong  tendency  in  the  acts 


38  ttCTURES  ON 

of  the  legislature  to  confound  civil  rights  and  civil  authority 
with  those  that  are  purely  moral  or  leligious.  Nor  is  it  sd 
easy  a  matter  in  practice,  to  ascertain  the  boundary,  in  everv 
instance,  and  draw  the  line  by  which  the  one  may  be  effectually 
discriminated  from  the  other,  as  one  at  first  would  be  apt  t6 
imagine.  The  distinction  has  been  better  preserved  in  our 
own  country,  notwithstanding  the  few  exceptions  of  little  mo- 
ment which  I  shall  mention,  than  perhaps  in  any  other*  There 
is  a  part  of  the  office  of  a  minister  in  this  country  that  is  pure- 
ly of  a  civil  nature,  derived  from  the  law  of  the  land,  and  quite 
extraneous  to  the  business  of  a  pastor,  which,  in  strictness,  is 
only  what  is  called  the  cure  of  souls.  By  this  secular  branch, 
I  mean,  the  power  with  which  presbyteries  are  vested  by  the 
legislature,  in  giving  decrees,  after  proper  inquiry,  against  the 
landholders,  or  heritors,  as  we  more  commonly  term  them,  for 
the  repairing,  or  the  rebuilding,  of  churches,  mrinses,  and  pa- 
rochial schools,  in  the  taking  trial,  and  the  admitting  of  school- 
ntiasters,  in  the  allotting  of  glebes,  and  perhaps  some  other 
things  of  a  similar  nature.  That  the  presbytery,  in  these  mat- 
ters, does  not  act  as  an  ecclesiastical  court,  is  evident^  not  only 
from  the  nature  of  the  thing,  but  from  this  further  considera- 
tion, its  not  being  in  these,  at  least,  in  what  relates  to  churches, 
manses  and  glebes,  as  in  all  other  matters  under  the  correction 
of  its  ecclesiastical  superiours,  the  provincial  synod,  and  the 
national  assembly,  but  under  the  review  of  the  highest  civil 
judicatory  in  this  country,  the  court  of  session. 

Another  kind  of  civil  power  committed  to  presbyteries,  is 
the  power  of  presenting  (as  some  understand  the  law)  to  vacant 
parishes,  upon  the  devolution  of  the  right,  by  the  patron's  ne- 
glecting to  exercise  it  for  six  months  after  the  commencement 
of  the  vacancy.  In  this,  however,  our  ecclesiastical  ideas,  and 
our  political,  so  much  interfere,  that  the  power'^of  issuing  out 
a  presentation,  has  never  yet,  as  far  as  I  know,  been  exerted 
by  any  presbyter)^,  in  the  manner  in  which  it  is  commonly  ex- 
erted by  lay  patrons,  or  in  the  manner  in  which  it  was  former- 
ly exerted  by  bishops  in  this  country,  in  the  times  of  episcopa- 
cy, or  in  which  it  is  at  present  exerted  by  bishops  in  Ireland,  as 
well  as  in  the  southern  part  of  the  island.  Presbyteries  do  com- 
monly, I  think,  on  such  occasions,  consultthe  parish,  and  regulate 
their  conduct  in  the  same  manner  as  though  patronages  were 
not  in  force  by  law.  I  should,  perhaps,  add  to  the  aforesaid 
list  of  particulars  not  properly  ecclesiastical,  the  concern  which 
the  pastor  must  take  along  with  the  heritors  and  elders  of  the 
parish,  in  the  management  and  disposal  of  the  publick  chari- 
ties, also  the  power  of  church  judicatories  in  appointing  con- 
tributions for  pious  uses,  to  be  made  throughout  the  churche'- 
within  their  jurisdiction* 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  39 

'  The  conduct  of  a  minister  in  regard  to  the  few  caTSes,  \<'hich, 
\h  strictness,  are  without  the  sphere  of  his  spiritual  vocation, 
is,  it  must  be  owned,  extremely  delicate  ;  and  not  the  less  so 
that  in  some  of  the  particulars  enumerated,  as  in  what  regards 
manses  and  glebes,  he  will  naturally  be  considered  as  a  party, 
from  the  similarity  of  situation  in  which  they  are  all  placed,  in 
the  very  cause  in  which  he  must  act  as  a  judge.  Whether  it  is  a 
real  advantage  to  us  to  possess  this  kind  of  secular  authority, 
is  a  question  foreign  to  my  present  purpose.  For  my  own 
part,  I  am  strongly  inclined  to  think,  that  if  the  legislature  had 
made  proper  provision  for  supplying  parishes  and  ministers 
with  sufficient  churches  and  manses,  by  means  of  the  civil  ma- 
gistrate only,  it  had  not  been  the  worse  for  us.  As,  on  the 
one  hand,  we  should  have  been  freed  from  temptations  to  par- 
tiality, which  will,  no  doubt,  sometimes  influence  our  judg- 
ment as  well  as  that  of  other  men,  so  on  the  other  hand,  w^e 
should  have  been  freed  from  the  suspicion  and  reproach  of  it, 
from  which  the  strictest  regard  to  equity  and  right  will  not  al- 
ways be  sufficient  to  protect  us.  And  in  a  character,  on  the 
purity  whereof  so  much  depends,  I  must  say,  it  is  of  no  small 
consequence,  not  only  that  it  be  unbiassed  by  any  partial  re- 
gards, but  even  that  it  be  beyond  the  remotest  suspicion  of 
such  a  bias. 

In  England,  the  natural  limits  have  been  very  ill  preserved^ 
and  both  kinds  of  jurisdiction,  the  civil  and  che  religious,  are 
made  strangely  to  encroach  on  one  another.  I  do  not  here  so 
much  allude  to  the  judicial  power  of  the  consistorial  courts,  in 
matters  matrimonial  and  testamentary,  though  these  are  pure- 
ly secular,  as  to  the  confusion  in  what  regards  the  executive 
part  of  jurisdiction.  As,  with  them,  church  censures  are 
followed  with  civil  penalties,  the  loss  of  liberty,  or  imprison- 
ment, and  the  forfeiture  of  the  privileges  of  a  citizen,  the  cler- 
gy must  have  become  absolute  lords  of  the  persons  and  pro- 
perties of  the  people,  had  there  not  been  lodged  in  the  civil 
judicatories,  a  paramount  jurisdiction,  by  which  the  sentences 
of  the  spiritual  courts  can  be  revised,  suspended,  and  annulled. 

Add  to  this,  that  the  participation  of  one  of  the  sacraments 
having  been  with  them,  by  a  very  short-sighted  policy,  perr 
verted  into  a  test  for  civil  offices,  a  minister  may  be  compelled, 
by  the  magistrate,  to  admit  a  man  who  is  well  known  to  be  a 
most  improper  person,  an  atheist,  blasphemer,  or  profligate. 
The  tendency  of  this  prostitution  plainly  is,  by  the  law  of  the 
land,  to  make  void  the  institution  of  Jesus  Christ,  as  far  as  re- 
gards its  meaning  and  design.  By  the  appointment  of  Jesus 
Christ,  the  participation  was  to  serve  in  the  participants 
purely  as  a  testimony  of  their  faith  in  him,  and  love   t» 


•40  LECTURES  ON 

him,  "  Do  this  in  remembrance  of  me."  Bv  the  law 
of  the  land,  it  is  rendered  a  qualification,  or  test,  abso- 
lutely necessary  for  the  attainment  of  certain  lucrative 
offices,  and  for  securing  a  continuance  in  them  when  at- 
tained ;  so  that,  in  a  great  number,,  it  can  serve  as  a  tes- 
timony of  nothing  but  of  their  secular  views.  And  to  ren- 
der this  testimony,  if  possible,  perfectly  unequivocal,  such  peo- 
ple must  have  a  certificate  from  the  minister  of  cheir  I'eceiv- 
ing  the  sacrament,  to  present  to  their  superiours  when  requir- 
ed. For  my  own  part,  I  do  not  see  how  the  divine  command- 
ment, in  what  regards  its  spirit,  power,  and  use,  couid  be  more 
effectually  abrogated  by  statute  than  by  thus  retaining  the 
form,  the  letter,  the  body  of  the  precept,  and,  at  the  same 
time,  totally  altering  the  purpose,  object,  and  intention. 

Men  have  been  very  long  in  discovering,  and  even  yet  seem 
scarcely  to  have  discovered,  that  true  religion  is  of  too  deli- 
cate a  nature  to  be  compelled,  if  I  may  so  express  myself,  by 
the  coarse  implements  of  human  authority  and  worldly  sanc- 
tions. Let  the  law  of  the  land  restrain  vice  and  injustice  of 
every  kind,  as  ruinous  to  the  peace  and  order  of  society,  for  this 
is  its  proper  province  ;  but  let  it  not  tamper  with  religion,  by 
attempting  to  enforce  its  exercises  and  duties.  These,  unless 
they  be  free-will  offerings  are  nothing ;  they  are  worse.  By 
such  an  unnatural  alliance,  and  ill-judged  aid,  hypocrisy  and 
superstition  may,  indeed,  be  greatly  promoted,  but  genuine 
piety  never  fails  to  suffer. 

Another  consequence  of  the  confusion  of  spiritual  jurisdic- 
tion and  secular  in  that  church,  however  respectable  on  other 
accounts,  (for  these  remarks  affect  not  the  doctrine  taught, 
the  morals  inculcated,  nor  the  form  of  worship  practised,  but 
only  the  polity  and  discipline)  another  consequence,  I  sa}',  is, 
that  ecclesiastical  censures  among  them  have  now  no  regard, 
agreeably  to  their  original  destination,  to  purity  and  manners. 
They  serve  only  as  a  political  engine  for  the  eviction  of  tithes, 
surplice  fees,  and  the  like,  and  for  the  execution  of  other  sen- 
tences in  matters  purely  temporal.  Would  it  have  been  possi- 
ble to  devise  a  more  effectual  method,  had  that  been  th^  ex- 
press purpose,  for  rendering  the  clerical  character  odious,  and 
the  discipline  contemptible  ?  Luckily  with  us,  in  those  few 
raatters  of  a  secular  nature  above  specified,  wherein  presbyte- 
ries are,  in  the  first  instance,  appointed  judges,  when  the  pres- 
bytery have  given  their  decree,  they  have  no  part  in  the  exe- 
cution, and  indeed,  no  further  concern  in  the  matter.  Their 
decision  is  nrierely  declarative  of  right,  and  their  power  is  ex- 
actly similar  to  that  of  arbitrators.  The  only  difference  is, 
that  the  fornier  are  authorised  by  law,  t^e  latter  by  the  nomi- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  41 

Iftation  of  the  parlies  :  but  in  neither  is  there  any  coercive  au- 
thority. The  par  ty  in  whose  favour  the  sentence  is  given,  ap- 
plies tor  the  intervention  of  the  lords  of  session  to  compel  the 
obedience  of  all  concerned.  This  interposition  is  always  grant- 
fed  as  a  thing  of  course,  unless  when  the  presbyterial  decree  is 
Drought  under  the  review  of  that  court  by  suspension.  In  this 
case  the  lords  may  affirm,  reverse,  or  alter,  as  they  see  cause. 
Then  it  becomes  their  own  sentence,  and  is  enforced  in  the 
usual  manner.  But  no  process  in  our  church  can  terminate  in 
excommunication,  or  in  any  ecclesiastical  censures,  but  a  pro- 
cess of  scandal,  by  which  term  is  commonly  understood  some 
flagrant  immorality.  These  censures  our  constitution  does 
not  permit  us  to  employ,  on  any  occasion,  as  expedients  for  ei- 
ther securing  our  property,  or  asserting  our  prerogatives  and 
power.  And  as  we  have  not  the  same  temptations  with  our 
neighbours  to  abuse  them,  so  neither  does  the  constitution  iu 
this  country  permit  the  civil  magistrate  to  interfere  with  the 
procedure  of  the  ecclesiastical  courts.  A  sufficient  security  is 
provided,  against  the  rashness  or  injustice  of  the  inferiour  ju- 
dicatories, the  presbyteries,  by  the  right  of  appeal  to  the  im- 
mediately superiour  tribunal,  the  synod,  and  thence,  in  the  last 
resort,  to  the  general  assembly.  Besides,  where  no  civil  pe- 
nalty follows  the  sentence  of  the  church,  as  is  now  very  properly 
the  case  with  us,  the  church  courts  have  this  additional  motive 
to  be  cautious  of  employing  those  censures  except  in  claimant 
cases,  namely,  that  if  their  sentences  be  not  supported  by  what 
I  may  call  the  verdict  of  the  country,  the  general  sense  of  the 
people,  they  will  very  soon,  and  very  justly,  become  contempti- 
ble. And  this  is  the  true  footing  on  which  all  ecclesiastical 
censures  ought  to  stand.  But  from  what  has  been  said,  it  is 
evident,  that  in  our  establishment,  sufficient  care  has  been  ta- 
ken that  there  be  no  material  encroachment  of  either  side,  on 
the  natural  province  of  the  other.  WTiat  I  have  said  on  this 
article,  it  will  be  observed,  militates  chiefly,  if  not  solely,  against 
what  may  be  called  a  coercive  power  in  the  ministers  of  religion, 
either  direct,  by  seizing  the  persons,  and  distraining  the  goods 
of  obnoxious  people,  or  which,  in  my  judgment,  is  still  worse, 
an  indirect  coercion,  by  emploving  ecclesiastical  censures  as 
the  tools  for  effecting  the  same  worldly  purpose.  Thus  much 
only  by  the  way. 

1  return  to  the  narrative.  When  the  western  provinces 
were  entirely  severed  from  the  eastern,  Italy,  France,  and 
Germany,  making  one  empire,  and  Spain  a  kingdom,  the 
principal  bishops  in  all  these  four  provinces,  who,  to  a  consi- 
derable share  of  the  national  riches,  had  this  advantage  iilso, 
that  they  were  at  the  head  of  an  order  which  engrossed  almost 

F 


42  LECTURES  ON 

all  the  little  learning  of  the  times,  were  commonly  chosen  fey 
the  prince  for  his  counsellors.  The  weight  which  this  honour- 
able distinction  gave  them  in  temporal  matters,  and  in  affairs 
of  state,  brought  an  immense  increase  of  authority  to  the  epis- 
copal tribunal.  In  less  than  two  hundred  years  afterwards, 
they  pretended  an  absolute  and  exclusive  right  to  all  criminal 
and  civil  jurisdiction  over  the  clergy,  and,  in  various  cases, 
over  the  laity  also,  under  pretext  that,  though  the  persons 
were  not,  the  causes  were,  ecclesiastical.  Beside  those,  they 
invented  another  sort  of  causes,  which  they  denominated 
causes  of  mixed  cognizance,  insiscing,  that  in  them,  the  bishop 
might  judge,  as  well  as  the  magistrate,  and  that  the  right  of 
prevention  ought  to  take  place  ia  favour  of  that  court  before- 
which  the  cause  should  first  be  brought.  In  consequence  of 
this  curious  distinction,  they  at  length,  through  their  exquisite 
solicitude,  and  the  attention  of  their  agents  and  dependents, 
who  found  their  account  in  their  diligence,  appropriated  all 
such  causes,  leaving  none  of  them  to  the  secular  judge.  And 
as  to  those  which  remained  still  uncomprehended,  under 
either  denomination,  of  ecclesiastical  or  mixed,  they  came  at 
last  to  be  comprised  under  one  universal  rule,  which  they  most 
assiduously  and  strenuously  inculcated  as  the  very  founda- 
tion of  the  faith  ;  which  was,  that  every  cause  devolved  on 
the  ecclesiastical  tribunal,  if  the  magistrate  either  refused,  or 
neglected,  to  do  justice.  It  was  no  wonder  that  in  those  days 
it  should  prove  a  common  saying,  that  "  except  in  places  bor- 
"  dering  on  the  infidels,  a  good  lawyer  makes  a  better  bishop 
'^  than  a  good  divine  ;"  for  the  more  he  was  occupied  in  hear- 
ing causes,  and  in  other  secular  functions,  the  less  leisure  he 
had  for  teaching,  which  fell  at  last  to  be  totally  disused  by 
those  of  that  station.  Thus  what  at  first  was  the  bishop^s 
principal,  I  may  say,  his  whole  business,  came  to  be  regarded 
as  no  part  of  it. 

But  if  the  clerical  claims  had  rested  here,  the  state  of 
Christendom  had  yet  been  tolerable.  There  still  remained  a 
remedy.  Whenever  the  people  in  republicks,  and  the  princes 
in  monarchies,  should  see  the  abuses  become  insupportable, 
they  would,  by  their  ordinances  and  edicts,  reduce  this  over- 
grown authority  of  churchmen  within  reasonable  limits,  as, 
in  former  times,  had  been  often  done  when  judged  necessary, 
iiut  that  encroaching  spirit  which  first  put  christian  states 
under  the  yoke,  in  a  great  measure  succeeded  at  last  in  de- 
priving them  of  the  means  of  wrenching  it  from  their  necks. 
The  lordly  prelates  having  already  arrogated  to  themselves  all 
the  pleas  of  clergymen,  together  with  so  many  pleas  of  lay- 
men, under  the  colour  of  spirituality,  and  having  shdre4  "^ 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY,  43 

ajmost  all  the  rest,  either  by  the  name  of  mixed  cognizance, 
or  by  superseding  the  magistrate,  under  the  pretext,  that  jus- 
tice had  been  denied,  or  unduly  delayed,  they  proceeded,  about 
the  middle  of  the  eleventh  century,  aided  by  the  profound 
ignorance  and  gross  superstition  of  the  age,  to  broach  and 
maintain,  that  this  extensive  power  of  judging  in  the  bishop 
was  not  derived  from  the  concession  of  princes,  or  from  their 
connivance,  or  from  the  consent  of  the  people,  or  from  imme- 
morial custom,  but  that  it  was  essential  to  the  episcopal  dig- 
nity, and  annexed  thereto  by  Christ.  Now  although  the  im- 
perial laws  are  still  extant  in  the  codes  of  Theodosius  and 
Justinian,  in  the  capitulars  of  Charlemagne,  and  Lewis  the 
pious,  and  other  later  princes,  both  oriental  and  occidental ; 
though  all  clearly  show  how,  when,  and  bv  whom  such  power 
was  conceded  ;  though  all  the  histories,  both  ecclesiastical  and 
civil,  agree  in  relating  the  same  concessions,  and  the  usages 
introduced,  mentioning  the  reasons  and  causes  ;  yet  so  noto- 
rious a  truth  has  not  been  able  to  surmount  the  single  affirma- 
tion of  the  canonist  doctors,  who  have,  on  the  contrary,  had 
the  audacity  to  support  the  divine  original  of  prelatical  domi- 
nion. They  have  even  bolclly  proclaimed  those  to  be  hereticks, 
who  pay  any  regard  to  evidence  as  clear  as  sunshine,  M^ho  can- 
not submit  entirely  to  renounce  their  understandings,  and  to 
be  treated  as  fools,  and  blind. 

They  did  not  even  confine  themselves  within  these  bounds, 
but  maintained,  that  neither  the  magistrate,  nor  the  prince  him- 
self,  could  without  sacrilege,  intermeddle  in  any  of  those 
causes  which  the  clergy  had  appropriated,  because  thev  nre 
things  spiritual,  and  of  spiritual  things  laymen  are  incapable. 
The  light  of  truth  was  not,  however,  so  perfectlv  extinct,  but 
that  even  in  those  dark  times  there  were  some  learned  and 
pious  persons  who  opposed  this  doctrine,  showing  that  both  the 
premises  were  false.  The  major,  that  laymen  are  incapable 
of  spiritual  things  is,  said  they,  absurd  and  impious,  since  they 
are,  by  adoption,  received  into  the  number  of  the  sons  of 
God,  made  brethren  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  citizens  of  the  New 
Jerusalem  ;  since  they  are  honoured  to  participate  in  the  di- 
vine grace,  in  baptism,  and  in  the  communion  of  the  body  and 
blood  of  the  Lord.  What  spiritual  things  are  there  superiour 
to  these  ?  And  if  there  be  none,  how  can  he,  who  partakes  in 
these  supreme  blessings,  be  called  absolutely  incapable  of  spi- 
ritual things  ?  But  the  minor  also  is  false,  that  the  causes  ap- 
propriated to  the  episcopal  tribunal  are  spiritual,  since  they  are 
all  reducible  to  these  two  classes,  transgressions  and  contracts^ 
which,  if  our  judgment  is  to  be  determined  by  the  qualities 


44  LECTURES  ON 

assigned  to  things  spiritual  in  scripture,  are  as  far  from  being, 
such  as  earth  is  from  heaven. 

But  it  seldom  fares  so  well  Avith  mankind,  that  the  majority 
is  on  the  side  of  truth  and  reason.  So  it  is  in  regard  to  our  pre- 
sent subject,  thnt  upon  the  spiritual  power  given  bv  Christ  to 
the  church,  or  whole  community  of  his  disciples,  of  binding 
and  loosing,  that  is,  of  excluding  from,  and  receiving  back 
into  their  communion,  and  upon  the  institution  of  Paul  for 
terminating  amicably  their  differences  in  matters  of  property 
by  reference,  without  recurring  to  the  tribunal  of  infidels, 
there  has  been  erected,  in  a  course  of  ages,  and  by  several 
degrees,  the  principal  of  which  have  been  pointed  out  to  you, 
a  spiritual-teinporal  tribunal,  the  most  wonderful  the  Avorld 
ever  saw.  In  consequence  of  this  it  has  happened,  that  in  a 
great  part  of  Christendom,  (I  speak  not  of  protestant  coun- 
tries, nor  of  the  Greek  church)  in  the  heart  of  every  civil  go- 
vernment, there  subsists  another,  independent  of  it,  a  thing 
which  no  political  writer  could  before  have  imagined  possible. 
How  church-power  came  all  at  last  to  centre  in  the  Roman 
pontiff,  I  intend  particularly  to  illustrate  in  some  subsequent 
lectures,  some  of  those  I  purpose  to  give  on  the  rise  and  pro- 
gress of  the  hierarchy.  In  the  history  of  ecclesiastical  juris- 
diction I  have  now  given,you  see  the  gradual  usurpations  of  the 
church,  or  rather  of  the  clergy,  on  the  temporal  powers  ;  iij 
the  next,  I  propose  to  begin  the  sketch  which  I  intend  to  lay 
before  you,  of  the  histor\  of  ecclesiastical  polity,  and  trace 
the  usurpations  of  part  of  the  church  upon  the  collective  body. 

I  cannot  conclude  without  acquainting  you  what  will  pro- 
bably appear  surprising,  that,  for  a  great  part  of  the  account 
now  given,  I  am  indebted  to  the  writings  of  a  Romish  priest, 
Fra  Paolo  Sarpi,  the  celebrated  historian  of  the  council  of 
Trent,  one  who,  in  my  judgment,  understood  more  of  the 
liberal  spirit  of  the  Gospel,  and  the  genuine  character  of  the 
christian  institution,  than  any  writer  of  his  age.  Why  he 
chose  to  continue  in  that  communion,  as  I  judge  no  man,  I 
do  not  take  upon  me  to  say.  As  little  do  I  pretend  to  vindi- 
cate it.  The  bishop  of  Meaux  (Histoire  des  Variations  des 
Eglises  Protestantes,  liv.  7"^^  ch.  IIO"^^)  calls  him  a  protestant 
and  a  calvinist  under  a  friar's  frock.  That  he  w^as  no  calvinist, 
;3  evident  from  several  parts  of  his  writings.  I  think  it  is 
also  fairly  deducible  from  these,  that  there  was  no  protestant 
sect  then  in  existence  with  whose  doctrine  his  principles  would 
tiave  entirely  coincided.  A  sense  of  this,  as  much  as  any 
thing,  contributed,  in  my  opinion,  to  make  him  remain  in  the 
communion  to  which  he  originally  belonged.  Certain  it  is, 
that  as  no  man  was  more  sensible  of  the  corruptions  and  usurpa- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  43 

tions  of  that  church,  no  man  could,  with  greater  plainness,  ex- 
press his  sentiments  concerning  them.  In  this  he  acted  very 
differently  from  those  who,  from  worldl}  motives,  are  led  to 
profess  what  they  do  not  believe.  Such,  the  more  effectually 
to  disguise  their  hypocrisy,  are  commonly  the  loudest  in  ex- 
pressing their  admiration  of  a  system  which  they  secretly  de- 
spise. This  was  not  the  manner  of  Fra  Paolo.  The  free- 
doms, indeed,  which  he  used,  would  have  brought  him  early 
to  feel  the  weight  of  the  church's  resentment,  had  he  not  been 
protected  by  the  state  of  Venice,  of  which  he  was  a  most  use- 
ful citizen.  At  last,  however,  he  fell  a  sacrifice  to  the  enemies 
which  his  inviolable  regard  to  truth,  in  his  conversation  and 
writings,  had  procured  him.  He  was  privately  assassinated 
by  a  friar,  an  emissary  of  the  holy  see.  He  wrote  in  Italian, 
his  native  language  ;  but  his  works  are  translated  into  Latin, 
and  into  several  European  tongues.  His  History  of  the  Council 
of  Trent,  and  his  Treatise  on  ecclesiastical  Benefices,  are  both 
capital  performances.  One  knows  not,  in  reading  them,  whe- 
ther to  admire  most  the  erudition  and  the  penetration,  or  the 
noble  freedom  of  spirit  every  where  displayed  in  those  works. 
All  these  qualities  have,  besides,  the  advantage  of  coming  re- 
commended to  the  reader,  by  the  greatest  accuracy  of  compo- 
sition and  perspicuit}  of  diction.  This  tribute  I  could  not 
avoid  paying  to  the  memory  of  an  author,  to  whom  the  repub- 
lickof  letters  is  so  much  indebted,  and  for  whom  I  have  the 
iiighest  regard. 


46  LECTURES  O^^ 


J.-r 


LECTURE  IV. 


J.N  my  last  lecture,  I  attempted  a  brief  detail  of  tlie  princi?^ 
pal  causes,  which  contributed  to  the  rise  and  progress  of  eccle- 
siastical jurisdiction.  In  doing  this,  I  had  occasion  to  show 
how,  from  regulations  originally  the  wisest  and  the  best  draar 
ginable,  there  sprang,  through  the  corruptions  that  ensued:, 
one  of  the  grossest  usurpations,  and  one  of  the  greatest  evils 
that  have  infested  the  christian  church.  This  we  are  well  en- 
titled to  call  it,  if  what  has  proved  the  instrument  of  avarice, 
ambition,  contention,  and  revenge,  as  well  as  the  source  of 
tyranny  and  oppression,  can  justly  be  so  denominated.  You 
know  that  the  rise  and  progress  of  that  form  of  government, 
into  which  the  church,  by  degrees,  came  at  last  to  be  moulded^, 
and  which  has  been  termed  the  ecclesiastical  polity,  and  the 
hierarchy,  is  to  be  the  subject  of  the  present,  and  of  some 
subsequent  lectures.  The  former  regarded  only  .the  jurisdic* 
tion  of  churchmen,  the  bishops  in  particular,  in  civil  matters  : 
the  present  subject  is  the  internal  polity  of  the  church,  and  the 
form  she  has  insensibly  assumed,  with  the  rules  of  subordina- 
tion which  have  obtained,  and,  in  many  places,  do  still  obtain, 
in  the  different  orders.  The  one  refers  properly  to  the  secu- 
larpowerof  ecclesiasticks,  the  other  to  the  spiritual.  The  two 
discussions  are  nearly  related,  and  have  generally  a  joint  con- 
nexion with  the  same  events,  operating  either  as  causes,  or  as 
instruments.  However,  in  treating  that  which  I  have  just 
now  mentioned  as  the  theme  of  this  discourse,  I  shall  avoid 
repetition  as  much  as  possible,  and  shall  not  recur  to  what  has 
been  observed  already,  unless  when  it  appears  necessary  in 
point  of  perspicuity,  for  the  more  perfect  understanding  of  the 
argument. 

Permit  me  to  premise  in  general,  that  the  question  so  much 
agitated,  not  only  between  protestants  and  papists,  but  also  be- 
tween sects  of  protestants,  in  regard  to  the  original  form  of 
government  established  by  the  apostles  in  the  church,  though 
not  a  trivial  question,  is  by  no  means  of  that  consequence 
which  some  warm  disputants,  misled  by  party  prejudices,  and 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  47' 

that  intemperate  zeal,  into  which  a  struggle  long  maintained 
commonly  betrays  the  antagonists  on  both  sides,  would  affect 
to  make  it.  It  is  said  proverbially  by  the  apostle,  as  holding 
alike  of  every  thing  external  and  circumstantial :  '•''  The  king- 
'■'■  dom  of  God  is  not  meat  and  drink,  but  righteousness,  and 
"  peace,  and  joy,  in  the  Holy  Ghost.  For  he  that  in  these 
*'  things  serveth  Christ,  is  acceptable  to  God,  and  approved  of 
*'^  men."  To  me  nothing  is  more  evident,  than  that  the  essence 
of  Christianity  abstractly  considered,  consists  in  the  system  of 
doctrines  and  duties  revealed  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and 
that  the  essence  of  the  christian  character  consists  in  the  belief 
of  the  one,  and  the  obedience  of  the  other.  "  Believe  in  the 
•"'  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  says  the  apostle,  "  and  thou  shalt  be 
"  saved."  Again,  speaking  of  Christ,  he  says,  "being  made 
"  perfect,  he  became  the  author  of  eternal  salvation  to  all 
*'  them  that  obey  him."  The  terms  rendered  sometimes  be- 
lieving, and  sometimes  obeying,  are  commonly  of  so  extensive 
signification  as  to  include  both  senses,  and  are  therefore  used 
interchangeably.  Now  nothing  can  be  conceived  more  absurd 
in  itself,  or  more  contradictory  to  the  declarations  of  Scrip- 
ture, than  to  say  that  a  man's  belief,  and  obedience  of  the  Gos- 
pel, however  genuine  the  one,  and  however  sincere  the  other, 
are  of  no  significancy,  unless  he  has  received  his  information 
of  the  Gospel,  or  been  initiated  into  the  church  by  a  proper 
minister.  This  is  placing  the  essence  of  religion  not  in  any 
thing  interiour  and  spiritual,  not  in  what  Christ  and  his  apos- 
tles placed  it,  something  personal  in  regard  to  the  disciple,  and 
what  is  emphatically  styled  in  scripture,  the  hidden  man  of  the 
heart ;  but  in  an  exteriour  circumstance,  a  circumstance  which 
in  regard  to  him  is  merely  accidental,  a  circumstance  of  which 
it  may  be  impossible  for  him  to  be  apprized.  Yet  into  this 
absurdity  those  manifestly  run,  who  make  the  truth  of  God's 
promises  depend  on  circumstantials,  in  point  of  order  no 
where  referred  to,  or  mentioned  in  these  promises ;  nay,  I 
may  say  with  justice,  no  where,  either  explicitly  declared,  or 
implicitly  suggested,  in  all  the  book  of  God. 

Not  but  that  a  certain  external  model  of  government  must 
have  been  originally  adopted  for  the  more  effectual  preserva- 
tion of  the  evangelical  institution  in  its  native  purity,  and  for 
the  careful  transmission  of  it  to  after  ages.  Not  but  that  a 
presumptuous  encroachment  on  what  is  evidently  so  instituted, 
is  justly  reprehensible  in  those  who  are  properly  chargeable 
with  such  encroachment,  as  is  indeed  any  violation  of  order,, 
and  more  especially  when  the  violation  tends  to  wound  charity, 
and  to  promote  division  and  strife.  But  the  reprehension  can 
alfect  those  only  who, are  conscious  of  the  guilt :  for  the  fault 


48  LECTURES  ON 

of  another  will  never  frustrate  to  rae  the  divine  promise  given 
by  the  Messiah,  the  great  interpreter  of  the  father,  the  faith- 
ful and  true  witness  to  all  indiscriminately,  without  any  limita- 
tion, that  ^'  he  who  receiveth  his  testimony  hath  everlasting 
*'  life."  I  may  be  deceived  in  regard  to  the  pretensions  of  a 
minister,  who  may.be  the  usurper  of  a  character  to  which  he 
has  no  right.  I  am  no  antiquary,  and  may  not  have  either  the 
knowledge  or  the  capacity  necessary  for  tracing  the  faint  out- 
lines of  ancient  esiabiishments,  and  forms  of  government,  for 
entering  into  dark  and  critical  questions  about  the  import  of 
names  .iud  titles,  or  for  examining  the  authenticity  of  endless 
genealogies  ;  but  I  may  have  all  the  evidence  that  conscious- 
ness can  give,  that  1  thankfully  receive  the  testimony  of  Christ, 
whom  I  believe,  and  love,  and  serve.  If  I  cannot  know  this, 
the  declarations  of  the  gospel  are  given  me  to  no  purpose  :  its 
proii:iises  are  no  better  than  riddles,  and  a  rule  of  life  is  b. 
dream.  But  if  I  may  be  conscious  of  this,  and  if  the  chris- 
tian religion  be  a  revelation  from  heaven,  I  may  have  all  the 
security  which  the  veracity  of  God  can  give  me,  that  I  shall 
obtain  eternal  life. 

"  No,"  interposes  a  late  writer*,  "  Cannot  God  justly 
"  oblige  men,  in  order  to  obtain  the  benefits  which  it  is  his 
*'  good  pleasure  to  bestow,  to  employ  the  means  which  his 
"  good  pleasure  hath  instituted?  It  pleased  not  him  to  cleanse 
"  Naaman  the  Syrian  from  his  leprosy  by  the  water  of  any 
"  other  river  than  the  Jordan  ;  insomuch,  that  had  Naaman 
"  used  the  rivers  of  Syria  for  this  purpose,  he  would  have 
"  had  no  title  to  expect  a  cure."  Certainly  none,  Mr.  Dod- 
well.  But  could  any  thing  be  more  explicit  than  the  oracle  of 
God  pronounced  by  the  prophet?  "Wash  in  Jordan  seven  times, 
"  and  thou  shalt  be  clean."  Naaman  did  not,  and  could  not  mis- 
Understand  it.  Whereas,  had  the  prophet  said  barely,  "  Wash 
*'  seven  times,  and  thou  shalt  be  clean  ;"  and  had  the  Syrian 
then  washed  seven  times  in  Abana  or  Pharphar,  rivers  of  Da- 
mascus, and  remained  uncured,  would  he  have  had  reason  to 
regard  Elisha  as  a  true  prophet  ?  Could  he  have  formed  from 
this  transaction  the  conclusion  which  he  did  so  justly  form  in 
favour  of  the  God  of  Israel?  Yet  such  an  expression  of  the 
promise,  wherein  an  essential  article  of  the  condition  is  sup- 
pressed, would  be  necessary  to  make  the  case  parallel  to  the 
present.  He  who  believeth  and  is  baptized^  saith  our  Lord,  t:hall 
be  saved.  You  qualify  his  promise  with  the  additional  clause, 
"  if  he  be  baptized  by  a  minister  who  has  himself  received 
"  baptism  and  ordination  in  such  a  particular  manner."     But 

•  Dodwell  ParKneiisj  34. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  49 

where  do  you  find  this  qualification  specified  ?  Scripture  is 
silent.  The  spirit  of  God  hath  not  given  us  the  remotest  hint 
of  it ;  would  it  not  then  be  wiser  in  you  to  follow  the  advice 
which  Solomon  hath  given  by  the  same  spirit  ?  Add  thou  not 
unto  his  xvords^  lest  he  reprove  thee^  and  thou  be  found  a  liar. 
The  terms  of  the  gospel-covenant  are  no  where,  in  the  sacred 
pages,  connected  with,  or  made  to  depend  on,  either  the  mi- 
nister, or  the  form  of  the  ministry,  as  Naaman's  cure  mani- 
festly was  on  his  washing  in  one  particular  river.  But  so 
strange  is  the  inconsistency  of  which  human  nature  is  suscep- 
tible !  No  person  can  be  more  explicit  than  this  man,  in  admit- 
ting that  there  is  nothing  in  scripture  from  which  we  can  infer 
that  any  particular  form  of  polity  was,  for  every  age  and  coun- 
try, appointed  in  the  church.  A  passage  to  this  purpose  I 
shall  soon  give  you  in  his  own  words.  Nay  more,  that  very 
episcopacy,  for  which  he  so  strenuously  contended,  making 
the  existence  of  Christianity  depend  upon  its  reception,  is,  by 
his  own  account,  not  only  destitute. of  scriptural  warrant,  but 
is  not  properly  of  apostolical  origin,  not  having  been  instituted 
till  after  the  death  of  the  apostles,  in  the  sixth  or  seventh  year 
of  the  second  century :  for  even  John,  who  lived  the  longest, 
is  not  said  to  have  reached  that  period.  Arrogant  and  vain 
man !  what  are  you,  who  so  boldly  and  avowedly  presume  to 
foist  into  God's  covenant  articles  of  your  own  devising,  nei- 
ther expressed  nor  implied  in  his  words  ?  Do  you  venture,  a 
worm  of  the  earth  ?  Can  rou  think  yourself  warranted  to 
stint  what  God  hath  not  stinted,  and  following  the  dictates  of 
your  contracted  spirit,  enviously  to  limit  the  bounty  of  the 
universal  parent,  that  you  may  confine  to  a  party,  what  Christ 
hath  freely  published  for  the  benefit  of  all  ?  Is  your  eye  evil, 
because  he  is  good  ?  Shall  I  then  believe,  that  God,  like  de- 
ceitful man,  speaketh  equivocally,  and  with  mental  reserva- 
tions ?  Shall  I  take  his  declaration  in  the  extent  wherein  he 
hath  expressly  given  it ;  or,  as  you,  for  your  own  malignant 
purpose,  have  new-vamped  and  corrected  it  ?  "  Let  God  be 
"  true,  and  every  man  a  liar."  But  as  for  you,  who  would 
thus  pervert  the  plainest  declarations  of  the  oracles  of  truth, 
and  instead  of  representing  Christ  as  the  author  of  a  divine 
and  spiritual  religion,  as  the  great  benefactor  of  human  kind, 
exhibit  him  as  the  head  of  a  faction,  your  party  forsooth.  I 
must  say  that  I  have  stronger  evidence  that  you  have  no  mis- 
sion, than  all  your  traditions,  and  antiquities,  and  catalogues, 
will  ever  be  able  to  surmount.  For  if  "he  whom  God  send*. 
"  eth,  speaketh  the  words  of  God,"  (and  this  is  a  test  which 
Christ  himself  hath  given  us)   he  who  contradicteth   God's 

G 


so,  LECTURES  ON 

words  is  not  sent  by  him.  This  is  alike  the  language  of  scrip,- 
^ure,  and  the  language  of  common  sense.  Yours  is  neither. 
In  regard  to  the  outward  order,  however  important  it  be,  it 
affects  not  the  essence  of  religion  in  the  least ;  and  even  our 
adversaries  themselves,  being  judges,  is  not  represented  in 
scripture  as  affecting  it.  The  garments  which  a  man  wears,  or 
the  house  in  which  he  lodges,  however  necessary  for  his  ac- 
commodation and  comfortable  subsistence,  are  not  as  his  limbs 
and  meinbers,  and  still  less  as  the  powers  and  faculties  of  his 
mind,  a  part  of  his  person.  Now  in  this  respect  there  appears 
a  very  close  analogy.  For  though  in  our  present  situation, 
clothes  and  dwelling  are  requisite  for  protecting  us  against  the 
inclemencies  of  the  weather,  and  other  external  accidents,  we 
may,  nevertheless,  have  both  clothes  and  dwelling  of  different 
forms,  yet  equally  commodious.  Nay,  one  form  may  be  more 
convenient  in  certain  climates,  and  certain  situations,  which  is 
less  convenient  in  other  climates,  and  other  situations.  The 
same  thing  may  with  equal  truth  be  affirmed  concerning  the 
forip  of  church- government.  This  is  evidently  true  also  of 
civil  government.  Of  whatever  mode  it  be,  absolute  or  limit- 
ed, monarchical  or  republican,  unless  it  degenerate  into  tyran- 
ny, it  is  entitled  to  the  obedience  of  the  subjects.  For  ''  the 
powers  that  be,"  «/  n^ai  t^mrixi  "  are  ordained  of  God."  No 
criterion  is  mentioned  but  established  possession.  Now  I  can 
see  DO  reason  why  a  church  may  not  subsist  under  different 
forms  as  well  as  a  state ;  and  though  it  must  be  owned,  that 
one  form  may  be  more  favourable  than  another  to  the  spirit 
and  design  of  the  constitution,  we  cannot  always  judge  with 
safety  from  the  first  of  these  how  much  it  has  retained  of  the 
last.  Nay,  I  must  acknowledge,  that  for  any  thing  I  could 
ever  discover  in  the  sacred  oracles  to  the  contrary,  the  extern 
nal  order  may  properly  undergo  such  alterations,  as  the  ends 
of  edification  in  different  exigencies  may  require,  and  prudence 
may  direct.  The  only  thing  of  real  imp(!a:tance  is,  that  nothing 
be  admitted  which  can,  in  any  way,  subvert  the  fundamental 
inaxims,  or  infringe  the  spiritual  nature  of  the  government. 

Thus  much  in  general  is  conformable  to  the  doctrine  both 
of  the  church  of  England,  and  of  the  church  of  Scotland,  For 
how  different  soever  these  churches  are  in  the  plans  of  govern- 
ment they  have  adopted,  and  how  much  soever  each  of  them 
is  attached  to  its  own,  they  "equally  avoid  limiting  the  chris- 
tian ministry  to  one  particular  model.  The  former  in  her  23d 
article,  entitled,  Ofministringin  the  Congregation^  says  express- 
ly, "  Those  We  ought  to  judge  lawfully  called  and  sent,  which 
^'  be  chosen  and  called  to  this  work  by  men,  who  have  publick 
^'  authority  given  unto  them  in  the  congregation,  to   call  and 


£CCLEStASTICAL  HISTORY.  Si 

**  send  ministers  into  the  Lord's  vineyard."  This,  if  It  mean, 
any  things  and  be  not  a  mere  identical  proposition,  of  whichj 
I  own,  it  has  some  appearance,  refers  us  ultimately  to  that  au- 
thorit}^,  however  modelled,  which  satisfies  the  people,  and  is 
settled  among  them.  Again,  in  the  Westminster  confession 
pf  faith,  which  is  of  equal  authority  with  us,  as  the  39  articles 
are  of  in  England,  chap,  xxv,  entitled.  Of  the  churchy  Sect.  3. 
"  Unto  the  catholick  visible  church  Christ  hath  given  the  min- 
*'  istry,  oracles^  and  Ordinances  of  God,  for  the  gathering  and 
"  perfecting  of  the  saints  in  ihis  life,  to  the  end  of  the  world." 
And  this  is  all  that  is  said  on  the  Subject.  Neither  has  pre- 
sumed to  delineate  the  essentials  of  a  christian  ministry,  or  to 
say  any  thing  which  could  be  construed  to  exclude  thoSe  who 
are  governed  in  a  different  manner  frorti  that  in  which  they 
themselves  are  governed.  So  much  moderation  has  on  this  ar- 
ticle been  showii  by  both  churchesi  I  shall  add  to  these  thfe 
doctrine  of  the  episcopal  reformed  church  of  Scotland,  contain- 
ed in  a  confession  of  faith  ratified  by  law  in  this  country  in 
1567  ;  which,  though  set  aside  in  the  time  of  the  civil  tvars,  to> 
make  room  for  the  Westminster  confession^  was  te-enacted 
after  the  restoration,  and  continued  in  force  till  the  abolition 
of  prelacy  at  the  revolution.  I  recur  to  it  the  rather,  in  order 
to  show  how  much,  on  this  article,  the  sentiments  of  bur  late 
nonjurors  (for  we  have  none  of  that  description  at  present)  dif» 
fer  from  the  sentiments  of  those  whom  they  considered  as  their 
ecclesiastical  predecessors,  and  from  whom  they  derived  their 
spiritual  pedigree. 

In  article  19,  entitled.  Of  the  notes  of  the  true  kWk^  (I  uSe  the 
words  of  that  formulary)  it  is  affirmed,  "  They  are  neither  an- 
"  tiquity,  title  usurped,  lineal  descent^  place  appointed,  nor 
*'  multitude  of  men  approving  an  errour.''  Again^  article  23,  Of 
the  right  administration  of  the  sacraments  ;-i— *•*  That  sacraments 
"  be  rightly  ministrate,  we  judge  two  things  requisite:  the  one, 
*'  that  they  be  ministrate  by  lawful  ministers,  whom  we  affirm 
"  to  be  only  they  that  are  appointed  to  the  preaching  6f  the 
'*  word,  they  being  men  lawfully  chosen  thereto  by  some  kirk, 
"  &c.  We  fly  the  dbctrine  of  the  papistical  kirk  in  participa*' 
"  tion  of  their  sacraments  :  1st.  Because  their  ministers  are 
*'  no  ministers  of  Christ  Jesus,  &c."  Here  not  Only  is  lineal 
descent  expressly  excluded,  but  its  very  channel  is  removed,  as 
the  popish  clergy  are  declared  (I  think  with  too  little  ceremo" 
ay  and  too  universally)  to  be  no  ministers  of  Christ.  Nay,  all 
that  appears  externally  necessary^  according  to  them,  to  con* 
stitute  a  minister,  is  the  choice  of  some  congregation.  Fat 
from  believing  one  particular  form  of  ecclesiastick  polity  to  be 
sacred  and  inviolable,  they  say,  article  21,  C^  general  conneils^ 


52  LECTURES  ON 

&c.  "  Not  that  we  think  that  any  policy  and  any  order  of  cere- 
"■  monies  can  be  appointed  for  all  ages,  times,  and  places." 

It  will  be  owned,  likewise,  by  those  who  on  this  subject  are 
capable  of  examining  with  coolness,  and  pronouncing  with  im- 
partiality, that  viQ  have  not  that  sort  of  information  in  holy 
writ,  from  which  we  can  with  certainty  form  a  judgment  con- 
cerning the  entire  model  of  the  apostolick  church.  What  we 
can  learn  thence  on  this  subject,  we  must  collect  from  scatter- 
ed hints  given  as  it  were  incidentally,  when  nothing  seemed 
less  the  intention  of  the  writers,  than  to  convey  to  us  a  parti- 
cular account  of  the  plan  of  the  society  they  had  formed.  It 
is  a  just  observation  of  a  writer  of  the  last  century,  and  de- 
serves the  attention  of  disputants  on  both  sides  : — "  Videmus 
"  apostolos  in  scriptis  suis  magis  sollicitos  fuisse  de  ministro- 
"  rum  virtutibus  quam  gradibus^  et  pluribus  inculcasse  et  des- 
"  cripsisse  eorum  mores,  quales  illo  statu  digni  essent  et  loco, 
*'  quam  quidem  de  forma  regiminis  disceptasse."  [Hoornbeck 
de  episcopatu.]  But  who  can  be  more  express  on  the  silence 
of  scripture,  in  regard  to  this  article  of  church-government, 
than  that  zealous  defender  of  prelacy,  Mr.  Dodwell,  in  a  pas- 
sage which  I  but  just  now  promised  to  give  you  in  his  own 
words.  They  are  these*  : — "  Est  sane  admodum  precaria  ora- 
"  nis  ilia  argumentatio,  qua  colligitur  disciplinze  ecclesiasticce^ 
"  in  posterum  recipiendae  rationem  omnem  e  scripturis  N.  Foe- 
"  deris  esse  hauriendara.  Nullus  enim  est  qui  id  profiteatur 
"  aperte  sacri  scriptoris  locus,  Et  ne  quidem  ullus  qui  ita  de 
"  regimine  agat  ecclesiastico  quasi  id  voluisset  scriptor,  aut 
"  scriptoris  auctor  Spiritus  Sanctus^  ut  formam  aliquam  unam 
"  regimhiis  ubique  et  in  orane  aevum  duraturi  describeret. 
"  Nusquam  scriptores  sacri  satis  expresse  tradiderunt,  quanta 
"  secuta  fuerit  m  regimine  ecclesiarum  mutatio  cum  prinaum 
"  discederent  a  synagogarum  communione  ecclesice.  Nus- 
"  quam  satis  aperte,  quantum  donis  concessum  fuerit  Spiritus 
"  S.  personalibus^  quantum  vicissim  locis  et  officiis.  Nusquam 
'^  officiarios  extraordinarios  qui  illo  ipso  seculo  finem  habituri 
"  essent  ab  ordinariis  satis  accurate  secernunt  qui  nullo  un- 
"  quam  seculo  essent,  dum  iterum  veniret  Christus,  in  desue- 
"  tudinem  abituri.  Imo  sic  omnia  turn  passim  nota  ipsi  quo- 
"  que  nota  supponunt,  nee  ipsi  posterorum  causa  explicant, 
"  quasi  eum  duntaxat,  qui  turn  obtinuerit,  statum  in  animo  ha- 
"  berent.  Officia  ipsa  nuspiam  qualia  fuerint,  aut  quam  late  pa- 
"  tuerint,  ex  professo  describunt,  quod  tamen  sane  faciendum 
"  erat  si  formam  prescripsissent  perpetuo  duraturam."  To 
this  I  shall  only  subjoin.  If  the  case  be  as  you,  Mr.  Dodwell, 

*  Paraenesis,  N,  14. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  53 

have,  in  my  opinion,  in  the  passage  above  quoted^  fairly  repre- 
sented it ;  if  ail  the  reasoning  be  quite  precarious  from  which 
men  conclude,  that  the  whole  model  of  ecclesiastical  discipline 
may  be  extracted  from  the  writings  of  the  New  Testament ; 
if  there  be  no  passage  of  any  sacred  writer  which  openly  pro- 
fesses this  design  ;  if  there  be  not  one  which  so  treats  of  eccle- 
siastical government,  as  if  the  writer,  or  the  writer's  author, 
the  Holy  Spirit,  had  intended  to  describe  any  one  form  of  po- 
lity, as  being  to  remain  eve^^''  where,  and  for  ever  inviolate  ;  if 
the  sacred  penmen  ha\'^e  no  where  declared,  with  suiEcient 
clearness,  how  great  a  change  must  take  place  in  church-go- 
vernment, when  the  churches  should  firstwithdrawfromthe  com- 
munion of  the  synagogues;  if  they  no  where  clearly  enough  show 
how  much  was  allowed  to  the  personal  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
and  how  much  also  to  places  and  offices  ;  if  they  no  where, 
with  sufficient  accuracy,  distinguish  the  extraordinary  officers 
who  were  not  to  outlive  that  age,  fi'om  the  ©rdinary  who  were 
not  to  cease  till  the  second  coming  of  Christ ;  nay,  if  all  the 
things  then  generally  known,  they  also  suppose  known,  and 
never,  for  the  sake  of  posterity,  explain,  minding  only  the  state 
wherein  things  were  at  the  time  ;  if  they  no  where  professed- 
ly describe  the  ministries  themselves,  so  as  to  explain  either 
their  nature,  or  their  extent :  which  was  surely  indispensable, 
if  they  meant  to  settle  a  model  in  perpetuity  ;  in  brief,  if  the 
case  was  really  as  that  gentleman  affirms  it  to  have  been,  (for 
what  is  here  put  by  me  hypothetically,  is  positively  averred  by 
him  in  terms  the  most  express)  what  can  we  conclude,  but  that 
nothing  v/as  farther  from  the  view  of  the  inspired  writers,  than 
to  prescribe  any  rule  to  us  on  the  subject,  or  to  give  us  any 
information  which  could  lead  us  to  imagine,  that  a  particular 
form  of  polity  was  necessary,  or  even  more  acceptable  to  God 
than  another?  What  can  we  conclude,  but  that  it  was  intend- 
ed by  the  Holy  Spirit  thus  to  teach  us  to  distinguish  between 
what  is  essential  to  the  christian  religion,  the  principles  to  be 
believed,  and  the  duties  to  be  practised,  and  which  are  therefore 
perpetual  and  unchangeable  ;  and  what  is  comparatively  circum- 
stantial, regarding  external  order  and  discipline,  which,  as  mat- 
ters of  expedience,  alter  with  circumstances,  and  are  therefore 
left  to  the  adjustment  of  human  prudence?  What  can  better 
account  for  the  difference  remarked  by  Hoorrvbeck,  that  the 
apostles  were  more  solicitous  about  the  virtues  than  the  de- 
grees of  the  ministers,  and  more  strenuous  in  inculcating  the 
manners  to  be  observed  by  them  as  suitable  to  their  office,  and 
conducing  to  their  usefulness,  than  copious  in  describing  tlu- 
form  of  their  government?  The  one  is  essential,  the  other  only 
circumstantial ;  the  one  invariable,  the  other  not. 


M  XECTtTRES  ON 

But  what  shall  we  say  of  a  doctrine  which,  like  this  of  the 
episcopal  polity,  was  never  alleged  to  belong  to  the  religion  of 
nature,  and  is  now  discovered,  by  one  of  its  warmest  advocates^ 
to  have  no  better  title  to  be  accounted  a  principle  of  revelation^ 
not  having  been  instituted  by  Christ,  or  his  apostles,  or  even 
in  their  time  ?  No  mention  is  made  of  it  in  scripture,  the  canon 
of  which  was  finished,  before  this  novelty  appeared  upon  the 
earth  ;  nor  is  any  appointment  given  in  holy  writ  by  anticipa-' 
tion  concerning  it.  Whence  therf'have  we  either  the  institU" 
tion,  or  the  doctrine  of  its  necessity  ?  I  know  not  what  answer 
Dodwell  could  give  to  this,  except  the  following.  From  fre- 
quent study,  profound  researches  into  antiquity  and  critical  in- 
vestigations concerning  doubtful  idioms,  we  have  made  the 
discovery.  These  exercitations,  I  acknowledge,  have  their 
use,  and  are  sometimes  subservient  to  the  cause  of  religious 
verity  ;  chiefly  indeed  for  illustrating  its  evidences,  or  repel- 
ling objections,  but  never  for  teaching  its  fundamental  princi- 
ples or  essential  duties.  These,  like  the  prophet's  vision,  are 
written  in  characters  so  legible  and  plain,  that,  "  he  may  fun. 
■who  readeth  them.^'  No  scope  for  Herculean  labour,  bodily  or 
mental.  "  Say  not^  Who  shall  ascend  into  heaven  P"  No  need 
for  scaling  the  firmament,  diving  into  the  abyss,  or  crossing  the 
ocean.  *••  The  word  is  nigh  thee^  in  thy  mouth.,  and  in  thine 
heart."  That  system  must  convey  a  strange  idea  of  revela- 
tion, which  exhibits  it  as,  in  respect  of  the  truths  necessary  td 
be  known  by  all,  perfectly  mute  to  the  unlearned,  and  of  ser- 
vice only  to  linguists,  criticks,  and  antiquaries.  How  different 
is  the  notion  conveyed  by  Christ, — the  founder  and  the 
finisher  of  the  faith  !  *'  I  adore  thee.,  O  Father.,  Lord  of  heaven 
and  earth.,  because  having  hidden  these  things  from  sages  and  the 
learned.,  thou  hast  revealed  them  to  babes."  It  was  to  instruct 
and  save  the  ignorant  and  the  sinful  that  Jesus  Christ  came 
into  the  world.  And,  in  consequence  of  this  divine  purpose, 
nothing  recommended  wretches  to  his  charitable  attention 
more  than  their  needs.  Besides,  if  the  scriptures  contain  a  re- 
velation from  God,  and  consequently  be  true,  we  must  admit 
them  to  be  perfect,  and  to  want  nothing  essential  to  the  infor-. 
mation  of  christians  in  faith  and  practice  ;  for  this  is  what  they 
affirm  concerning  themselves.  "  They  are  able  to  make  men 
TX}ise  unto  salvation :  for  all  scripture.,  given  by  inspiration  of 
God.,  isprof  table  for  doctrine.,  for  reproof  for  correction  in  righ* 
teousness^  that  the  man  of  God  may  be  perfect^  thoroughly  fur^ 
nished  unto  all  good  xvorks."  But  in  this  a  true  Dodwellian 
can  never  consistently  acquiesce,  who  maintains  a  certain  ec- 
clesiastical polity  to  be  essential,  concerning  which  he  at  the 
same  time  admits,  that  scripture  has  given  us  neither  informa-- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  Si 

tion  nor  command.  This  necessarily  forces  us  into  the  dilem- 
ma of  affirming,  either  that  the  doctrine  of  Dodwell  is  not  only 
false  but  pernicious,  in  subverting  the  suihority  of  scripture  ; 
or  that  scripture  is  both  false  and  self-contradictory,  in  assert- 
ing the  perfection  of  its  own  doctrine,  whilst  it  has  withholden 
all  intelligence  upon  one  article  ;  without  the  observance  of 
which,  all  the  other  instructions  it  gives  are  vain,  our  faith  is 
\'ain,  we  are  yet  in  our  sins.  And  who  is  the  revealer  of  this 
article,  this  mystery  which  hath  been  hidden  from  ages  and  ge- 
nerations ?  If  the  revelation  itself  be  of  importance,  it  is  but 
just  to  acknowledge,  that  the  world  is  indebted  for  it,  more  to 
Mr.  Henry  Dodwell,  than  to  all  the  apostles  and  evangelists 
of  our  Lord,  or  even  to  all  the  sacred  penmen  of  either  Old  or 
New  Testament  put  together. 

But  as  it  is  not  every  one's  province  or  humour  to  trace  non- 
sense through  all  its  dark  and  devious  windings,  I  shall  desist 
from  expatiating  further  on  the  absurdity  of  making  that  a 
doctrine  of  the  gospel  with  which  the  New  Testament  does 
not  acquaint  us,  or  a  christian  institution  v/hich  did  not  com- 
mence till  after  the  decease  of  the  last  of  the  apostles  ;  and 
^hall  only  further  observe,  that  the  defect  of  scriptural  evi- 
dence, so  frankly  acknowledged  on  the  other  side,  will  be  al- 
lowed by  any  person  of  understanding  to  be  an  irrefragable  ar- 
gument, that  the  polity  or  model  of  government  was  not  judg- 
ed by  the  apostles  to  be  of  so  great  consequence,  as  that  it 
should  of  necessity  be  either  fixed  or  perfectly  known.  Where- 
as it  must  have  been  of  the  last  consequence,  if  the  very  exis- 
tence of  a  church,  and  the  efficacy  of  God's  word  and  ordi- 
nances, totally  depended  on  it- 

But  that  there  was  no  such  dependance,  as  is  supposed,  on 
any  thing  in  the  form  of  the  ministry,  is  manifest  also  from 
this,  that  in  the  directions  given  to  christians,  as  to  the  judg- 
ments they  ought  to  make  of  those  who  may  assume  the  char- 
acter of  teachers  m  divine  things,  the  people  are  never  direct- 
ed to  an  examination  of,  what  I  may  call,  the  ostensible  source 
cf  the  authority  of  those  teachers,  but  solely  to  the  considera- 
tion of  their  character  and  conduct,  and  of  the  doctrine  M'hich 
they  teach.  "  Beware  of  false  prophets,"  said  our  Lord, 
*'  who  come  to  you  in  sheep's  clothing,  but  inwardly  thev  are 
"  ravening  wolves."  But  how  shall  we  beware  cf  them,  or 
by  what  criterion  shall  we  distinguish  the  false  from  the  true  ^ 
Shall  we  critically  examine  their  spiritual  pedigree,  and  see 
whether,  by  an  uninterrupted  succession  of  regular  bnptisms 
and  ordinations,  they  be  lineally  descended  from  the  apostles? 
Impossible.  A  method  this  wliich  would  involve  every  thing 
in  impenetrable  darkness,  and  plunge  all  the  hopes  and  pros- 


5^  LECTURES  ON 

pects  of  the  christian  into  a  skepticism,  from  which  there  could 
be  no  recovery.  On  the  contrary,  the  test  he  gives  is  plain 
and  familiar.  Mark  his  words":—"  Ye  shall  know  them  by 
*'  their  fruits.  Do  men  gather  grapes  of  thorns,  or  figs  of 
tt  thistles  ?  Even  so,  every  good  tree  bringeth  forth  good 
u  fruit,  but  a  corrupt  tree  bringeth  forth  evil  fruit.  A  good 
ti  tree  cannot  bring  forth  evil  fruit,  neither  can  a  corrupt  tree 
tt  bring  forth  good  fruit.  Every  tree  that  bringeth  not  forth 
a  good  fruit  is  hewn  down,  and  cast  into  the  fire.  Wherefore 
«i  by  their  fruits  you  shall  know  them."  And  the  apostle  John 
says,  "  Believe  not  every  spirit,  but  try  the  spirits  whether 
"  they  are  of  God."  And  how  are  we  to  try  them  ?  The  se- 
quel plainly  shows,  that  it  is  by  the  coincidence  of  their  doc- 
trine with  that  of  the  gospel.  The  like  was  also  the  method 
prescribed  under  the  former  dispensation  by  the  prophet. 
»■'•  To  the  law  and  to  the  testimony,"  says  he,  "  if  they  speak 
*'  not  according  to  this  word,  it  is  because  there  is  no  light  in 
*■'■  them."  A  very  different  mode  of  trial  would  now  be  assign- 
ed by  a  zealous  patroniser  of  the  hierarchy,  popish  or  protes- 
tant. 

There  is  a  memorable  incident,  and  entirely  apposite  to  the 
point  in  hand,  which  is  recorded  by  tAvo  of  the  evangelists, 
Mark  and  Luke.  John  said  to  Jesus,  "  Master,  we  saw  one 
*'  casting  out  devils  in  thy  name,  and  we  forbade  him,  because 
*'  he  followeth  not  us."  Jesus  answered,  "  Forbid  him  not,  for 
"  there  is  no  man  who  shall  do  a  miracle  in  ray  name,  that  can 
*'  lightly  speak  evil  of  me.  For  he  that  is  not  against  us  is 
*'  for  us."  The  apostles  still  retained  too  much  of  the  Jewish 
spirit,  not  to  consider  more  the  party  than  the  cause.  *'  He 
■"  followeth  not  us," — a  reason  which  to  this  day,  alas  !  would 
be  thought  the  best  reason  in  the  world  by  most  christian  sects, 
and  by  everj'  individual  who  possesses  the  spirit  of  the  sectary. 
From  Christ's  testimony  we  have  ground  to  believe,  that  what 
this  man  did,  was  done  with  an  intention  truly  pious  ;  not  to 
make  dissension,  or  form  a  party  against  the  disciples,  but 
to  promote  the  common  cause.  And  what  was  so  done,  would 
probably  be  productive  of  the  great  end  of  the  christian  ministry,, 
the  conversion  of  the  hearers  to  the  faith,  love,  and  obedience 
of  the  Messiah. 

But  even  where  so  much  cannot  he  said  of  the  goodness  of 
the  intentions,  we  are  not  warranted  to  decide  against  the  uti- 
lity or  success.  The  apostle  Paul  observes,  that  whilst  some 
preach  Christ  of  love,  others  do  it  of  envy,  and  strife,  and 
contention.  This,  I  imagine,  is  the  scriptural,  I  say  not  thg 
ecclesiastical,  notion  of  schismatical  teachers.  For  that  alone 
is  schism  in  the  sense  of  the  holy  writ,  which  wounds  charity, 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  5f 

and  which,  in  order  to  umte  christians  more  closely  to  a  sect 
or  faction,  alienates  their  hearts  from  one  another,  and  conse» 
quently  from  the  interest  of  their  common  master;  or  which 
detaches  them,  in  respect  of  love,  even  though  outward  unity 
should  not  be  violated,  from  the  whole  community  of  chris- 
tians, in  order  to  attach  them  more  firmly  to  a  part.  The  for- 
mer only,  those  who  preach  out  of  love,  the  apostle  regards  as 
true  ;  the  latter,  those  who  preach  out  of  envy  and  strife,  he 
considers  as  pretended  preachers,  or  heralds  of  Christ.  Yet 
he  adds  : — "  What  then  ?  Notwithstanding  every  way,  whe* 
"  ther  in  pretence  or  in  truth,  Christ  is  preached,  and  I  there- 
"  in  do  rejoice,  yea,  and  will  rejoice."  Would  he  have  said 
so,  think  ye,  if  a  defect,  either  in  the  mission,  or  in  the  dispo- 
sition of  the  minister,  could  have  rendered  their  ministrations 
ineffectual  to  the  hearers  ?  In  those  days  of  the  church's  infan- 
cy, when  the  far  greater  part  of  the  world  was  Jews  and  Pa- 
gans, such  teachers  as  the  apostle  speaks  of,  though  bad  men 
themselves  and  uncommissioned,  might  have  been  instru* 
mental  in  converting  infidels  and  idolaters  to  the  faith  of 
Christ.  But  there  had  been  no  subject  of  joy  here,  if  the 
conversion  of  such,  however  sincere,  and  their  p'articipation 
in  the  ordinances  of  religion,  however  piously  intended  by  the 
participants,  had  been,  according  to  the  doctrine  of  our  anta*- 
gonists,  rendered  ineffective  by  the  defects  of  the  instrument* 
The  very  success  of  the  preaching  of  such  unauthorized  pre* 
tenders  would,  in  that  case,  have  been  a  fitter  subject  of  grief 
to  the  apostle,  than  of  joy,  as  the  unhappy  proselytes  mighty 
by  an  apparent  conversion  to  Christ,  have  been  lulled  into  a 
security  much  more  fatal  than  the  unbelief  in  which  they  were 
before.  His  joy,  on  the  contrary,  was  a  demonstration  of  his 
sentiments,  that  the  people  might  receive  spiritual  benefit, 
whatever  exceptions  there  might  be  to  the  ministry.  I  own 
the  case  is,  in  many  respects,  worse  with  the  modern  authors 
©f  division,  the  founders  of  new  sects,  in  countries  where 
Christianity  is  universally  professed,  and  where  there  is  free 
access  by  the  scripture,  both  to  its  doctrines,  and  to  its  precepts^ 
It  is  hard  to  conceive  to  what  the  disciples  of  some  recent 
sectaries  can  be  made  proselytes,  unless  to  uncharitablenessj 
hatred  and  calumny  agamst  their  fellow-christians,  and  that 
©n  the  most  frivolous  or  unintelligible  pretexts.  For  neither 
idolatrous  worship,  nor  the  exaction  of  unlawful  terms  of  com* 
munion,  are  so  much  as  pretended.  If,  according  to  our 
Lord's  criterion,  we  are  to  know  the  tree  by  the  fruits,  the  evil 
fruits  above-mentioned,  the  invariable  effects  of  such  divi- 
sions will  be  thought  more  analogous  to  the  nature  of  briers 
and  thorns,  than  to  the  fruit  of  the  fig-tree,  or  of  the  vine-. 

H 


58  LECTURES  ON 

However,  even  of  such  contentious  teachers  I  would  not  pre- 
sume to  say,  that  they  may  not  occasionally  do  good,  though 
there  be  but  too  great  reason  to  dread  that  the  evil  preponde- 
rates. And  even  here  I  am  to  be  understood  as  speaking  of 
the  first  authors  of  such  unchristian  separations.  I  know  top 
well  the  power  of  education,  and  of  early  prejudice,  to  impute - 
equal  malignity  to  those  who  may  succeed  them  whether 
teachers  or  disciples.     But  to  return  : — 

To  assign  to  the  Messiah,  or  rather,  under  that  colour, 
to  procure  for  themselves  a  worldly  kingdom,  was  not  an  er- 
rour  peculiar  to  the  Jews.  The  same  evil  principle,  which  in 
them  proved  the  cause  of  the  rejection  of  the  true  Messiah, 
proved  quickly  among  the  Gentiles,  who  acknowledged  him, 
the  source  of  the  grossest  corruption  and  perversion  of  his 
institution.  After  it  became  the  aim  of  church  rulers  to  secu- 
larize the  kingdom  of  Christ ;  they  uniformly  had  it  for  their 
object,  in  exact  conformity  to  the  example  the  Pharisees  had 
given  them,  to  remove  the  attention  of  men  from  things  spi- 
ritual and  essential,  to  things  corporal  and  circumstantial. 
And  in  this,  as  in  all  other  corruptions,  they  have  but  too  well 
succeeded.  The  more  effectually  to  answer  this  purpose, 
they  have  not  scrupled  to  introduce  such  dogmas,  (of  which 
that  I  have  been  examining  in  this  lecture  is  an  example)  as 
tend  to  subvert  the  spirit  of  the  gospel,  and  are  inconsistent 
with  the  veracity  of  God. 

Of  a  very  different  character  and  tendency  are  some  sen- 
timents I  have  latelv  met  with  concerning  the  spiritual  king- 
dom of  the  Messiah,  in  the  Sermons  of  Mr.  Comings,  preben- 
dary of  St.  Patrick's,  Dublin,  now  deceased.  They  convey  an 
idea  of  the  church  truly  rational,  enlarged,  and  sublime  j  such 
as  strongly  distinguishes  it  from  all  the  pitiful  and  contracted 
pales,  so  uncharitably  erected  by  the  different  sectaries  of  all 
known  denominations,  popish  and  protestant,  established  and 
unestablished :  for  it  is  not  a  legal  establishment,  as  some 
vainly  imagine,  or  any  thing  merely  external,  that  either  makes 
or  unmakes  a  sectary  in  the  scriptural  sense  :  it  is  solely  the 
spirit  by  which  a  man  is  actuated.  But  without  any  further 
comment,  I  shall  leave  this  author  to  speak  for  himself,  by 
giving  you  his  own  words.  In  my  judgment,  he  unfolds  his 
conceptions  on  this  subject  with  uncommon  energy.  It  may 
not  however  be  improper  to  premise,  that  the  words  in  the 
gospel,  to  wiiich  the  preacher  specially  refers,  are  these  :  (Luke 
xvii.  15,  19.)  One  of  them^  -when  he  saw  that  he  was  healed^ 
tvn.-ed  back^  and  with  a  loud  voice  glorified  God^  and  fell  down 
on  his  face  at  Jesus'  feet,  givi7ig  him  thanks  ;  and  he  xuas  a  Sa- 
maritan.     And  Jesus  ansxvering^    said^    Were   there  not  ten 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  m 

cleansed  ?  But  xvhere  are  the  nine  ?  There  are  not  found  that 
returned  to  give  glory  to  God^  save  this  .stranger.  And  he  said 
u?ito  him^  Arise^  p-o  th?.;  xvay^  thy  faith  hath  made  thee  rvhole. 
"  Thus  you  see,  though  the  Jews  learnt  no  humility,  no  gra- 
*'  titude,  yet  the  Samaritan^  ignorant  as  he  was  then  thought, 
"  misinformed  as  he  is  noiv  reckoned  ;  yet  the  Samaritan  was 
**■  deeply  impressed  with  both.  The  Almighty  himself  taug'iit 
"  him,  and  he  was  obedient  to  the  divine  instructor.  I'he 
*■'•  pride  of  religion  v/ould  make  the  Jews  brand  him  with  the 
**  factious  name  of  herctick  or  schismatick  ;  but  were  he  here- 
"  tick  or  schismatick,  he  oftered  to  heaven  as  grateful  a  sacrir 
''  fice  as  was  ever  laid  on  the  altar  at  Jerusalem  by  prophet  or 
•■'  by  saint.  The  contentions  about  the  forms  of  religion  de- 
"  stroy  its  essence.  Authorized  by  the  example  of  Jesus 
"  Christ,  we  will  send  men  to  the  Samaritan  to  find  out  how 
*'  to  worship.  Though  your  church  was  pure,  without  spot 
*'  or  imperfection,  yet  if  your  heart  is  not  turned  to  God,  the 
*'  worship  is  hateful,  and  the  prayers  are  an  abomination. 
"  The  homage  of  the  darkest  pagan  worshipping  he  knows 
*'  not  what,  but  still  worshipping  the  unknown  power  that 
"  formed  him,  if  he  bows  with  humility,  if  he  praises  with  gra- 
"  titude,  his  homage  will  ascend  grateful  to  heaven  ;  while  the 
♦'  dead  careless  formality  of  prayer,  offered  up  in  the  proudest 
**  christian  temples,  shall  be  rejected  as  an  offering  vuiholy. 
**  For  think  you  that  the  Almighty  esteems  names  and  sects  \ 
"  No  :  it  is  the  heart  that  he  requires  ;  it  is  the  heart  alone 
''  that  he  accepts.  And  much  consolation  does  this  afford  to 
"  the  contemplative  mind  of  man.  We  may  be  very  ignorant 
*'  in  spiritual  matters,  if  that  ignorance  cannot  be  removed, 
"  and  yet  may  be  very  safe.  We  may  not  know  in  what 
*.'  words  to  clothe  our  desires  in  prayer,  or  where  to  find  lan- 
*'  guage  worthy  of  being  presented  to  the  majesty  of  heaven. 
"  But  amitlst  the  clouds  that  surround  us,  here  is  our  com- 
"fort:  in  every  nation,  he  that  worshippeth  with  humility, 
*'  worshippeth  aright ;  he  thatpraiseth  with  gratitude,  praiseth 
*'  well.  The  pride  of  establishments  may  despise  him,  but 
*'  the  wisdom  and  the  righteousness  of  heaven  will  hear, 
*'  and  will  approve  him.  It  was  to  the  humble  thankful  Sa- 
*'  maritan,  though  separated  from  the  true  church  ;  yet  it  was 
*'  to  him  alone,  because  he  alone  returned  to  glorltV  God,  that 
*'  Jesus  Christ  said,  Arise^go  thy  ivay^  thy  faith  hath  made  tl\ee 
*'  whole.  Thus,  in  a  moment,  vanished  and  becanae  of  no  ef-. 
"  feet,  the  temple  of  the  Jews,  built  by  prophetick  direction  : 
**  its  ritual  given  by  their  illuminated  legislator  :  all  gave  way 
"  to  the  profound  humility,  and  the  sublime  gratitude,  of  what 
*'  they  called  an  unbeliever,  of  what  Jesus   ChrivSt  called  the 


60  LECTURES  ON 

*'  only  faithful  servant  of  God  among  them."  Permit  me 
only  to  subjoin,  to  the  above  quotation,  what  is  particularly 
apposite  to  the  subject  now  in  hand.  Let  us  but  reflect  who 
were  at  that  time  the  sacred  ministers,  the  teachers  and  the 
priests  of  the  Samaritans  ?  In  the  very  beginning  of  theirdefec- 
tion,in  the  revolt  of  the  ten  tribes  under  Jeroboam,  the  sacred 
historian  acquaints  us,  that  this  idolatrous  king  cast  out  the 
priests  of  the  Lord,  and  made  priests  of  the  lowest  of  the  people, 
who  were  not  of  the  family  of  Aaron,  or  of  the  sons  of  Levi. 
And  of  the  same  character  they  still  remained.  No  order  of 
men,  existing  at  present  in  the  christian  church,  can  give  any 
evidence  of  a  divine  right  compared  with  that  of  the  tribe  of 
Levi,  and  of  the  posterity  of  Aaron  in  the  Jev/ish.  Yet  this 
passage,  in  relation  to  the  humble,  the  pious,  and  the  thankful 
Samaritan,  may  show  us  effectually,  if  we  be  capable  of  being 
taught,  that,  under  no  dispensation  of  things  whatsoever,  can 
the  validity  of  God's  covenant  be  made  to  depend  on  the  min- 
istry, or  his  promises  be  rendered  ineffectual  to  the  humble  be- 
liever, and  grateful  worshipper,  on  account  of  any  defect  in 
the  priesthood.  We  see  tllKt  such  defects  were  no  obstruc- 
tion to  the  efficacy  of  the  humble  Samaritan's  faith,  or  the  ac- 
ceptance of  his  person.  Arise^  go  thy  way^  thy  faith  hath  made 
thee  whole.  ;. 

Thus  much  I  thought  proper  to  premise,  in  regard  both  to 
the  nature  and  to  the  consequence  of  the  question  about  the 
government  instituted  by  the  apostles  in  the  church.  I  next 
proceed  to  the  examination  of  the  fact.  And  in  this  it  is  my 
purpose  to  proceed  with  all  the  candour  and  impartiality  of 
which  I  am  capable  ;  and  to  speak  out  boldly  what  appears  to 
me  most  probably  to  have  been  the  case,  without  considering 
what  sect  or  party  it  mav  either  offend  or  gratify.  I  am  sen- 
sible that,  in  historical  inquiries  of  this  kind,  it  becomes  us  to 
be  modest,  since  we  must  know,  that  persons,  both  judicious 
and  candid,  have  mistaken  ;  for,  on  all  the  questions  that  arise 
from  the  subject,  there  have  undoubtedly  been  men  of  this 
character  on  the  opposite  sides.  It  is  comparatively  of  little 
moment,  whether  we  approve  most  the  monarchical,  the  aris-- 
tocratical,  or  the  democratical  form  of  church  government,  or 
to  which  of  the  three  we  have  thought  it  our  duty  to  subject 
ourselves.  The  only  errour  that  is  here  of  consequence,  is, 
when  people  are  led  to  consider  this  as  a  ground  of  disunion, 
or,  which  is  still  worse,  of  alienation  of  affection  from  those 
who,  though  differing  in  this  particular,  have  received  the 
like  precious  faifh  with  themselves  ;  when  they  think  them- 
selves warranted  by  this  difference  ih  unchurching  their  bre- 
thren, as  the  phrase  is,  that  is,  in  pronouncing  them  to  have 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  M 

no  concern,  no  portion  in  the  commonwealth  of  Christ.  This 
I  take  to  be  indeed  a  fundamental  errour,  as  it  strikes  at  the 
root  of  that  charity  which  is  the  end  of  the  commandment, 
and  the  bond  of  perfectness  ;  and  consequently,  without  wliich, 
whatever  be  our  boasted  attainments  in  faith,  in  knowledge,  or 
in  clerical  degrees,  we  are,  in  all  that  concerns  the  vitals  of 
religion,  absolutely  nothing.  It  was  to  guard  you  all  against 
an  extreme  of  this  kind,  that  I  have  been  so  particular  in  the 
discussion  of  this  preliminary  point. 

Now  as  to  the  form  of  the  church  first  instituted  by  Christ 
and  his  apostles,  let  it  be  observed,  that  there  were  at  that  time 
especially  two  objects  which  seemed  equally  to  claim  attention. 
The  one  was  the  conversion  of  the  v/orld  to  the  Messiah,  the 
other  was  not  only  the  preservation  of  the  converts  that  should 
be  made,  but  the  securing  of  a  continuance  of  the  faith  in 
their  families.  These  two,  though  they  concur  in  the  ulti- 
mate end  they  are  fitted  to  answer,. the  glory  of  God  in  the  sal- 
vation of  men,  are  very  different  in  themselves,  and  require 
very  different  instruments  and  measures.  To  take  a  simili'^ 
tude  from  temporal  things,  it  isit^e  thing  to  conquer  a  king- 
dom, and  become  master  of  it,  and  another  thing  to  govern  it 
when  conquered,  so  as  to  retain  the  possession  which  has  been 
acquired.  The  same  agents,  and  the  same  expedients,  are  not 
properly  adapted  to  both.  For  the  first  of  these  purposes, 
there  was  a  set  of  extraordinary  ministers  or  officers  in  the 
church,  who,  like  the  military  forces  intended  for  conquest, 
eould  not  be  fixed  to  a  particular  spot,  whilst  there  remained 
anv  provinces  to  conquer.  Ti|ieir  charge  was  in  a  manner  uni- 
versal, and  their  functions  ambulatory.  For  the  second,  there 
was  a  set  of  ordinary  ministers  or  pastors  corresponding  to 
civil  governpurs,  to  whom  it  was  necessary  to  allot  distinct 
charges  or  precincts,  to  which  their  services  were  chiefly  to  be 
confined,  in  order  to  instruct  the  people,  to  preside  in  the  pub- 
lick  worship  and  religious  ordinances,  and  to  give  them  the 
necessary  assistance  for  the  regulation  of  their  conduct.  With- 
out this  second  arrangement,  the  acquisitions  made  could  not 
have  been  long  retained.  There  must  have  ensued  an  uni- 
versal relapse  into  idolatry  and  infidelity.  This  distinction 
of  ministers  into  extraordinary  and  ordinary  has  been  admit- 
ted by  controvertists  on  both  sides,  and  therefore  cannot  j  ustly 
be  considered  as  introduced  (which  sometimes  happens  to  dis- 
tinctions) to  serve  an  hypothesis.  The  great  patron  of  prelacy 
avows  the  difference,  in  a  quotation  lately  given  from  his  Pane- 
nesis,  at  the  same  time  that  he  complains  that  the  sacred  writers 
have  not  been  explicit  in  assigning  the  boundaries  of  either: 
an  oversight  which  I  own  I  think  would  have  been  unpardona- 


62  LECTURES  ON 

ble  in  them,  if  they  had  believed  the  knowledge  of  this  article 
so  indispensable  as  Mr.  Dodwell  did. 

Of  the  first  kiad,  oi-  extraordinary  ministers,  were  the  apos- 
tles, prophets,  and  evang>jiists.  i  hese  -at  least  wtrQ  the  chief.i 
For,  from  some  passages  in  Paul's  M'^ritings-,  it  appears  verv 
probable,  that  all  those  who  were  endowed,  in  an  eminent  de- 
gree, with  any  of  the  ^npia-fjittrai^  or  supernatural  jrifts,  were  con- 
sidered as  a  sort  of  extraordinary  ministers.  Compare  1  Cor. 
xii.  28,  &c.  with  Eph.  iv.  11,  &c.  But  it  is  not  with  that  ex- 
traordinary and  temporary  arrv.ngement,  suppr,rted  bv  the 
power  of  working  miracles,  which  was  calculated  chieSy  for 
the  founding  of  the  church,  that  we  are  here  concerned.  It 
is  with  the  ordinary  and  permanent  establishment,  to  the  suit- 
able discharge  of  the  duties  of  which,  it  is  not  the  ;^ap»(!r^«T«^ 
but  the  ;^^«p/Tsj,  not  the  miraculous  and  shining  gifts  of  the  spi- 
rit, but  the  less  conspicuous,  though  more  important,  graces 
of  knowledge,  faith,  and  charity,  which  are  requisite. 

In  regard  to  these,  it  is  from  the  acts  of  the  apostles  and  the 
epistles,  that  we  principally  derive  our  iniormation.  Th'imce 
we  learn,  that  the  apostles  regularly  established  cliurches,  aiid 
settled  therein  proper  ministers  in  every  city  and  village, 
"where  they  had  made  as  many  proselytes  as  might  form  a  con- 
gregation. I  do  not  say  that  the  settlement  of  pastors,  and 
other  officers,  took  place  immediateiv,  on  the  conversion  of 
the  people,  but  on  the  first  convenient  occasion  afterwards. 
The  converts  every  where  seem,  for  some  time,  to'have  been 
instructed  chiefly  by  such  of  their  number  as  were  endowed 
with  supernatural  gifts,  those  called  prophets  in  particular, 
who  also  had  the  principal  part  in  conducting  the  publick  offices 
of  religion.  Of  these  mention  is  made  in  the  thirteenth  chap- 
ter of  the  Acts.  This  was  the  footing  on  which  the  apostles 
commonly  left  the  places  they  travelled  to,  on  their  first  visit. 
It  was  not  till  afterwards,  either  by  messengers  sent  on  pur- 
pose, or  on  a  second  or  third  visit,  that  they  gave  them  fixed 
teachers.  It  has  been  said,  that  in  the  extraordinary  and  un- 
settled state  of  the  church,  the  sacred  offices  were  not  so 
much  appropriated  to  the  ministers,  as  to  exclude  private 
christians  from  occasionally  exercising  them,  especially  in  the 
absence  of  the  former.  The  first  order  given  to  the  eleven  7(? 
maJ^e  converts  (for  such  is  the  import  of  ucc^HTivs-etTi)  to  baptize 
and  to  teach^  carries  in  it  nothing  from  which  we  can  discover, 
that  it  was  a  commission  intrusted  to  them  exclusively  as 
apostles  or  ministers,  and  not  given  them  also  as  christians  ; 
and  that  the  apostles  were  particularized,  because  best  quali- 
fied, from  their  long  attendance  on  Christ's  ministry,  for  pro- 
moting his  religion  in  the  world  ;  but  not  with  a  view  to 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  m 

exclude  any  christians,  who  were  capable,  from  co-operating 
with  them  in  the  same  good  cause.  That  this  last  was  the 
construction  then  put  upon  that  charge,  appears  not  improba- 
ble, from  the  subsequent  part  of  the  scripture  history.  Phi- 
lip, though  no  apostle,  and  probably  at  that  time  no  more  than 
a  deacon,  (that  is,  a  trustee  for  the  poor  in  matters  purely  se- 
cular) did  all  to  the  Ethiopian  eunuch,  which  the  apostles  had 
in  charge  with  regard  to  aii  nations.  He  converted,  baptized, 
and  taught  him.  No  reasonable  man  can  doubt  that  any  pri- 
vate christian  was  then,  and  is  still,  warranted  if  he  can,  to 
convert  an  infidel,  and  to  teach  him  the  principles  of  Christi- 
anity. Yet  these  are  two  important  parts  of  the  apostolical 
commission.  If  I  should  say  the  most  important  parts,  I 
should  not  speak  without  warrant.  Oar  Lord  himself  made 
proselytes,  and  instructed  them,  but  baptized  none,  leaving 
this  merely  ministerial  work  to  his  disciples.  Peter  was  sent 
to  open  the  door  of  faith  to  the  Gentiles,  by  the  conversion  of 
Cornelius  and  his  family.  But  the  charge  of  baptizing  theni 
he  trusted  entirely  to  the  christian  brethren  who  attended  him. 
Ananias,  a  disciple,  was  employed  to  baptize  Paul.  And  Paul 
says  himself  of  his  own  mission,  that  Christ  sent  him  not  to 
baptize,  but  to  preach  the  Gospel,  denoting  thereby,  according 
to  the  import  of  the  Hebrew  idiom,  that  baptizing  compared 
with  preaching,  though  a  part,  was  but  an  inferiour  and  subor- 
dinate part  of  his  charge.  Nothing  here  advanced  can  justly 
be  understood  to  combat  the  propriety  of  limiting,  for  the  sake 
of  discipline,  the  power  of  baptizing  to  fewer  hands  than  that 
of  preaching,  when  once  a  fixed  ministry  is  settled  in  a  church, 
and  regulations  are  adopted  for  its  government. 

The  doctrine  I  have  been  illustrating,  so  far  from  being,  as 
some  romanists  ignorantly  pretend,  one  of  the  many  novelties 
sprung  from  the  protestant  schism,  was  openly  maintained  at 
Rome  without  censure,  about  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century, 
by  Hilary,  a  deacon  of  that  church,  a  man  of  erudition  and 
discernment,  of  whom  I  shall  have  occasion  to  speak  after- 
wards. This  commentator,  in  his  Exposition  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Ephesians  iv.  11,  12,  has  these  words  "  Postquam  om- 
"  nibus  locis  ecclesise  sunt  constitutae,  et  officia  ordinata,  aliter 
"•  composita  res  est,  quam  cosperat ;  primum  enim  omnes  do- 
"  cebant,  et  omnes  baptizabant,  quibuscunque  diebus  vel  tem- 
"  poribus  fuisset  occasio."  A  little  after,  "  Neque  Petrus 
*•'  diaconos  habuit  quando  Cornelium  cum  omni  domo  ejus  bap- 
*'  tizavit ;  nee  ipse,  sed  jussit  fratribus  qui  cum  illo  ierant  ad 
"  Cornelium  ab  Joppe."  Again :  ''  Ut  ergo  cresceret  plebs, 
"  et  midtiplicaretur,  omnibus  inter  ioitia  concessum  est  et 
*'  evangelizare,  et  baptizare,   et  scripturas  in  ecclesia  expla- 


64  LECTURES  ON 

"  nare."  Such  were  the  sentiments  of  a  respectable  member 
of  the  Roman  presbytery  in  those  days  ;  for  conclave,  both  in 
name  and  thing,  was  as  little  known  at  Rome  then  as  it  is  with 
us  at  present.  Now  though  the  gradual  settlement  of  a  regu- 
lar ministry  throughout  the  churclr,  would  gradually  abolish 
an  usage  of  this  kind,  it  is  natural  to  conclude,  that  wherever 
there  happened  to  be  a  return  of  the  like  exigencies,  through 
want  of  licensed  pastors,  every  private  christian  would  not  only 
be  entitled,  but  bound,  if  capable,  to  supply  the  defect.  So 
thought  the  christians,  who  were  dispersed  on  the  persecution 
mentioned  Acts  viii.  For  "  they  that  were  scattered  abroad," 
the  historian  makes  no  distinction,  "  went  every  where, 
"  preaching  the  word."  Now  the  apostles  remained  in  Jeru- 
salem, and  ordinary  pastors  were  not  yet  appointed.  Thijs  is 
agreeable  to  what  appears  to  have  been  the  general  opinion, 
and  even  the  practice  where  circumstances  required,  as  far 
down  as  Tertullian's  time,  about  the  beginning  of  the  third 
century.  This  author,  the  first  of  the  Latin  fathers,  in  his  Ex- 
hortatio  ad  castitatem^  wherein  he  inveighs  against  second  mar- 
riages,  having  urged  that  Paul  made  it  necessary  in  a  bishop 
that  he  be  the  husband  of  one  wife,  introduces  an  antagonist 
replying,  that  the  prohibition  to  pastors  implies  a  permission 
to  others  to  marry  oftener.  He  answers,  that  the  distinction 
among  christians,  between  the  priesthood  and  the  people,  who, 
by  the  evangelical  law,  are  all  priests,  is  of  the  church's  mak- 
ing, that  is,  as  I  understand  him,  is  not  of  divine  original ; 
referring  to  what  appears  to  have  been  the  approved  practice 
of  laymen  even  then,  who,  when  none  of  the  clerical  order 
could  be  had,  celebrated  the  eucharist,  and  baptized,  and  serv- 
ed as  priests  to  themselves.  "  Three  persons,"  says  he, 
"  though  laymen,  make  a  church."  "  Ubi  ecclesiastici  ordi- 
"  nis  non  est  consessus,  et  offers,  et  tinguis,  et  sacerdos  es  tibi 
*'  solus.  Sed  ubi  tres,  ecclesia  est,  licet  laici."  It  matters 
nothing  to  the  present  question,  that  his  doctrine  of  the  unlaw- 
fulness of  second  marriages  is  unreasonable  ;  it  matters  uo- 
thing,  that  his  argument  is  inconclusive  ;  we  are  concerned 
only  with  the  fact,  to  which  he  refers  as  notorious. 

Hardly  could  any  attentive  reader,  who  is  a  stranger  to  th«- 
disputes  that  in  latter  ages  have  arisen  about  holy  orders, 
think  the  passage  susceptible  of  any  other  meaning  than  that  I 
have  given  it,  and  which  indeed  Rigaltius,  a  romanist,  and 
Grotius,  a  protestant,  had  given  before  me.  I  know  the  pains 
which  have  been  taken  by  some  learned  men,  who  cannot  con- 
ceive a  kingdom  of  Christ,  that  is  not  a  kingdom  of  priests,  to- 
tally to  disguise  this  passage.  The  French  Jesuit  Petavius 
admits,  indeed,    according  to  the  obvious    meaning  of    the 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY,  es 

words,  that  Tertullian  argues  from  the  known  praictice  in  the 
specified  ;  and  as  the  Romish  church  acknowledges  the  validi- 
ty of  lay-baptism,  he  admits  also,  that  tinguis  means,  you  bap- 
tize ;  but  adhering  sacredly  to  the  principles  of  his  party,  does 
not  admit  that  offers  can  be  interpreted,  you  consecrate  the  eu- 
charist.  The  Irish  nonjuror  Dodwell,  of  whose  system  lay- 
baptism  and  lay-consecration  are  equally  subversive,  not  only 
admits,  but  proves,  that  unless  offers  refer  to  the  priestly  of- 
fice, as  well  as  tingiiis^  there  can  be  no  meaning  in  the  argu- 
ment. At  the  same  time  he  affirms,  that  this  author  does  not 
argue  from  a  known  practice,  but  from  his  own  opinion  of  the 
rights  of  laymen  in  such  emergencies,  explaining  offers  et  tin- 
guis^ you  have  a  right  to  celebrate  the  eucharist  and  to  baptize: 
The  impartial  inquirer,  who  has  no  hypothesis  to  serve,  will 
readily  agree  with  Dodwell,  that  the  only  interpretation  oi  oj^ 
ferre^  as  connected  with  tinguere^  is  to  celebrate  the  eucharist; 
and  no  less  readily  agree  with  Petavius,  that  the  only  natural 
import  of  the  present  of  the  indicative  here  used,  is,  you  do; 
and  not,  you  have^  in  my  judgment^  a  title  to  do.  The  argument 
drawn  from  an  allowed  and  known  custom,  in  support  of  his 
opinion,  was  confessedly  of  some  weight,  but  an  argument  in 
support  of  his  opinion,  drawn  from  another  opinion  of  hii 
equally  questionable,  and,  as  Dodwell  thinks,  contradicted  by 
the  universal  practice  of  the  age,  was  of  no  conceivable  weight, 
and  could  not  have  been  adduced  by  any  person  of  common 
understanding.  Tertullian,  like  Dodwell,  held  some  extrava- 
gant tenets,  but  was  incapable  of  arguing  so  ridiculously  as 
this  critick  would  represent  him.  That  laws,  declarative  of 
right,  are  sometimes  expressed  in  the  present  of  the  indicative, 
is  true,  but  never  when  the  common  practice  is  in  contrfidiction 
to  the  law.  Dodwell's  quotations  from  the  apostolical  consti- 
tutions are  so  far  from  answering  his  purpose,  that  tiiey  are  a 
confirmation  of  what  was  just  now  observed.  I'hev  are  not 
more  declarative  of  the  canons  than  of  the  customs  which  ihcii 
obtained.  If  the  prevailing  practice  had  been  repup:n:int  to 
those  canons,  no  writer  of  common  sense,  who  did  not  intend 
to  deceive,  would  have  expressed  himself  in  that  manner. 
The  words  which  conclude  the  argument,  Igitnr  si  habesjussa' 
cerdotis^  &c.  showno  more  than  thatthe  author  inferred  the  right 
from  the  practice.  Is  there  any  incoherence  in  saying,  In  an 
urgent  case^  when  no  priest  can  he  founds  you  baptize^  you  give 
the  eucharist^  and  you  alone  serve  as  priest  to  yourself.  If,  then'^ 
you  have  the  right  of  priesthood  in  yourself  in  a  case  of  neccsjiity^ 
you  ought  to  have  the  discipline  of  a  priest^  ivherever  it  may  be 
necessary  to  exercise  the  right.  This  is  literally  Tertairuiu\  ar- 
gument. 


6S  LECTURES  ON 

But  to  return  from  this  digression  to  those  fixed  officers  or 
ministers,  whom  the  apostles  assigned  to  the  churches  which 
the^;  planted  ;  beside  some  general  names  used  promiscuously 
in  Scripture,  such  as  iya/mam^  cT/eTairxrtXs/,  ^T)»f«Ta«,  X8/Tspj«*,  guides, 
teachers,  ministers,  officers,  and  perhaps  a  few  others,  there 
are  three  terms  more  frequently  applied  to  them,  which  are, 
tTTia-Kovoi^  <ar(is9-ft/T«fo«,  J*/a«.8vo;,  bishops  or  ovcrscers,  presb3-ters  or 
elders,  and  deacons  or  attendants.  Now  the  doubts  that  have 
arisen  are  chiefly  concerning  the  two  first  of  these  nismes, 
tTTtTKO'Troi  and  tfftcr^vTtfoi ;  and  the  question  is,  whether  they  are 
names  for  the  same  office,  or  for  different  offices.  I'his,  at; 
least,  is  the  first  question  ;  for  it  must  be  owned,  that  there 
have  been  some  strenuous  advocates  for  the  apostolical  origin 
of  episcopacy,  who  have  entirely  given  up  the  argument  found- 
ed on  the  names.  As  to  the  last  title  of  the  three,  hotMvoi^  it 
is  allowed  on  all  hands,  that  it  is  the  name  of  a  different  office, 
though  commentators  are  not  entirely  agreed  as  to  the  nature 
?ind  extent  of  that  office. 

That  the  terms  fTt^rxavti  and  tffiv0vrtf»sy  are  sometimes  used 
promiscuously  in  the  New  Testament,  there  is  no  critick  of 
any  name  who  now  pretends  to  dispute.  The  passage,  Acts 
XX.  is  well  known.  Paul,  we  are  told,  v.  17,  "  from  Miletus 
*'  sent  to  Ephesus,  and  called  the  elders  of  the  church"  n-ug 
<nr/u<r^t/Tfp85  Tjff  i^mxiie-iet?.  In  the  spccch  he  made  to  them,  when 
they  were  convened,  he  has  these  words,  v.  28 :  "  Take  heed, 
*'  therefore,  to  yourselves,  and  to  all  the  flock  over  which  the 
*'  Holy  Ghost  hath  made  you  overseers,"  s5r<9^Bo^j<5,  bishops,  is 
the  term  in  the  Greek.  Here  there  can  be  no  question  that 
the  same  persons  are  denominated  presbyters  and  bishops. 
Pretty  similar  to  this  is  a  passage  in  the  epistle  to  Titus,  ch.  i. 
The  apostle  says,  ver.  5,  "  For  this  cause  left  I  thee  in  Cr^te, 
"  that  thou  shouldst  set  in  order  the  things  that  are  wanting, 
*'  and  ordain  elders,  Ts-pta-^vltfbu.  in  every  city."  Ver.  6,  "  If 
"  any  be  blameless,"  &c.  Ver.  7,  "  For  a  bishop  must 
"  be  blameless,"  eviTM-prav.  Here,  unless  we  will  say  that 
the  apostle  argues  very  incoherently,  he  must  mean  the 
same  thing  by  elder^  at  the  fifth  verse,  and  bishops  at  the  se- 
venth. In  like  manner  the  apostle  Peter :  1  Peter  v.  1.  "  The 
*'  elders,  Ts-peT^vlifm.  which  are  among  you,  I  exhort,"  &c.  Ver. 
2.  "  Feed  the  flock  of  God  which  is  among  you,  taking  the 
"  oversight  thereof,"  fTric-KoTravlei.  discharging  the  office  of  bi- 
shops. The  truth  is,  the  word  cTnc-KoTroi  was  properly  the  name 
of  office,  and  ■zs-fitr^vle^'^^  was  a  title  of  respect,  borrowed  from 
the  Jewish  custom,  (which  was,  indeed,  analogous  to  that  of 
other  nations)  of  calling  not  only  the  members  of  the  sanhedrim 
^(icTjivlipoi,  elders  or  senators,  but  also  the  members  of  the  city 
councils. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  65^ 

To  all  this,  indeed,  the  common  answer  is,  that  most  of  the 
tiames  of  offices  are,  in  scriptural  language,  not  so  uniformly 
appropriated  to  the  particular  oflfices,  as  not  occasionally  to  be 
applied  to  others,  agreeably  to  the  etymological  import  of  the 
words.  Thus  the  term  ^luxovoi  is  applied  to  the  apostles  them- 
selves. John  calls  himself  -irpec-jivj  spa,  elder;  so  also  does  Pe- 
ter ;  and  Christ  is  styled  eminently  both  apostle  and  bishop. 
To  the  same  purpose  it  is  urged,  that  sometimes  in  the  Old 
Testament  the  high  priest  is  called  simply  the  priest.  It  would, 
however,  be  much  more  to  the  point,  if  a  passage  could  be 
named  wherein  an  ordinary  prwst  is  styled  high  priest.  The 
^uperiourorder,  itis  universally  admitted,  includes  the  inferiour, 
but  this  does  not  hold  conversely.  Now,  in  the  first  passage 
■above  quoted  from  the  Acts,  it  is  manifest^  that  the  ordinary 
pastors  of  Ephesus  are  styled  bishops  ;  for  in  no  period  of 
episcopacy,  according  to  the  present  acceptation  of  the  word, 
was  there  a  plurality  of  bishops  in  one  city  and  church.  It  is 
indeed  affirmed,  that  in  one  passage,  2  Cori  viii,  23^  the  terni 
vipoatle  is  applied  to  those  who  were  of  a  loWer  order  than  the; 
apostles  properly  so  called.  Itis,  however,  observable,  that  the  ex- 
pression there  used,  isaa-esaAo;  ex.K.M'rim,  apostles,  or  messengers  of 
the  churches,  not  apostles  of  Jesus  Christ,  or  apostles  simply, 
without  any  addition,  which  are  the  common  expressions  used 
for  those  who  were  selected  to  be  the  principal  promulgators 
of  the  faith.  And  it  shows,  that  Theodoret^  Who  lived  several 
hundred  years  after,  was  very  mtich  puzzled  where  to  find  the 
origin  of  the  office  of  bishop,  as  the  word  in  his  time  implied, 
when  he  imagined  he  discovered  it  in  a  phrase  which  occurs 
but  once  in  the  New  Testament,  and  of  which  the  application 
is  extremely  doubtful.  But  the  short,  though  full  reply^  to  thd 
aforesaid  answer,  is  this  :  It  is  not  denied,  that  those  terms 
urged  by  the  objectors,  arei,  on  certain  occasions,  used  with 
greater  latitude  than  in  the  ordinary  application.  Neverthe- 
less, the  ordinary  and  peculiar  application  is  supported  by  so 
many  clear  passages  of  sacred  writ,  as  to  be  rendered  quite  in- 
dubitable. On  the  contrary,  one  single  passage  from  the  apos* 
tolical  writings  has  not  yet  been  produced,  in  which  it  appears 
from  the  context,  that  the  two  terms  3r/)fc/3t/7ff!«5  and  £5r«rxo55-®* 
mean  different  offices. 

Nay,  we  can  say  more  than  this,  which  may  be  called  a  tie-* 
gative  and  presumptive  proof  only,  that  there  is  the  strongest 
positive  evidence  which  the  natui-e  of  the  thing  can  admit,  that 
in  those  writings  the  two  terms  uniformly  mean  the  same  of* 
fice.  The  apostle  Paul,  in  the  directions  he  gave  to  Timothy^ 
about  the  proper  supply  of  churches  with  suitable  ministers, 
takes  particular  notice  of  two  orders,  and  no  more.     One  of 


6S  LECTURES  ON 

them  he  calls  bishops,  and  the  other  deacons.  Now  if  by  bi- 
shops he  meant  what  in  modern  style  is  so  denominated,  those 
who  have  the  charge  of  many  presbyters,  it  is  astonishing  that 
he  should  not  think  it  of  importance  to  give  any  directions 
about  the  qualifications  of  presbyters,  who  had  the  immediate 
inspection  of  the  flock;  at  the  same  time  that  he  is  very  parti- 
cular in  regard  to  the  qualifications  of  deacons,  though  their 
order  has  ever  been  allowed  to  be  much  inferiour  to  the  other. 
And  if  (as  even  some  friends  of  episcopacy  have  admitted;  he 
here  means  by  bishops  only  presbyters  ;  that  an  office  of  so  great 
importance  as  the  bishops,  (if  it  was  a  different  and  superiour 
office)  should  havebeen  entirely  overlooked,  is  no  It  ss  surprising. 
Further,  in  support  of  this  argument,  that  there  were  but  two 
orders  then  established,  let  it  be  observed,  that  Paul,  in  ad- 
dressing the  Phiiippians  i.  1,  expresses  himself  in  this  manner; 
*'  To  all  the  saints  at  Philippi,  with  the  bishops  and  deacons." 
All  commentators  of  an}  name,  except  Dr.  Hammond,  of 
whom  I  shall  take  notice  afterwards,  agree,  that  by  bishops 
here  is  meant  the  ordinary  pastors  or  presbyters  j  for  it  is  al- 
most universally  allowed,  as  I  had  already  an  occasion  of  hint- 
ing, that  when  the  distinction  came  to  be  established  there 
was  never  more  than  one  bishop  in  a  city  or  church.  And  as 
true  it  is  also,  that  then  there  was  no  city  which  had  a  church, 
and  not  a  bishop.  Now  if  there  was  a  bishop,  in  the  modern 
sense,  at  Philippi,  when  the  apostle  wrote  that  letter,  it  looks 
a  little  strange,  that  he  who  was  the  chief  of  that  christian  so- 
ciety should  be  the  only  person  that  was  neglected  by  the  apos- 
tle on  that  occasion.  The  arbitrary  suppositions  that  have  been 
framed,  in  order  to  elude  the  force  of  this  argument,  as  they 
are  without  even  the  shadow  of  evidence,  can  merit  no  regard. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  is  remarkable,  and  may  serve,  if  possible, 
to  convince  the  most  obstinate  of  the  futility  of  those  supposi- 
tions, that  in  the  epistle  written  by  Polycarp  to  the  same  con- 
gregation, about  sixty  years  after,  we  find  mention  only  of  those 
two  orders,  the  presbyters  and  the  deacons  ;  and  no  more  allu- 
sion made  either  to  a  vacancy  in  their  number,  or  to  any  spiri- 
tual superiour,  present  or  absent,  than  was  made  by  Paul  in  his 
letter  to  them  so  long  before.  Now  whether  we  call  their  pas-- 
tors  bishops:^  with  the  apostle,  or preabyters^  with  Poljcarp,  is 
a  matter  of  no  consequence,  as  it  is  evident  that  both  speak  of 
two  orders  only  among  them,  and  not  of  three  ;  and  wherever 
one  of  these  names  is  employed,  the  other  is  dropped,  this  be- 
ing the  surest  evidence  which  the  nature  of  the  thing  admits, 
that  the  words  were  synonymous. 

But  I  observe  further,  that  the  sacred  penmen,  in  speaking 
of,  or  to  particular  churches,  if  the  spiritual  instructors  and 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  69 

guides  of  the  people  be  mentioned  at  all,  always  mention  thetai 
in  the  plural  number,  which,  though  it  may  be  compatible  with 
some  little  difference  in  rank  or  precedency,  can  scarcely  be 
thought  compatible  with  so  material  a  difference  as  that  of  o£' 
fice  or  trust.  Thus  the  apostle  to  the  Thessalonians,  1  Tbesa. 
V.  12,  "  We  beseech  you,  brethren,  to  know  them  which  labour 
"  among  you,  and  are  over  you  in  the  Lord,  and  admonish 
**  you,"  7*s  KOTTtsiilxi  xJit  zrpotiu^iyimt»f  iiiB-eliiif]oi4-  It  is  remarkable 
too,  that  the  term  ^pti^etfi.iv'^,  as  every  other  name  implying  da- 
Tection,  or  government,  came  afterwards  to  be  appropriated  to 
the  bishop  ;  with  whom,  according  to  the  doctrine  of  high 
church,  the  whole  authority  over  the  congregation  was  origi- 
nally lodged.  The  presbyters  could  do  nothing  but  as  they 
happened  to  be  authorized  or  commissioned  by  him-  I'he  use 
of  such  terms  here,  in  the  plural,  when  the  apostle  was  addres- 
sing the  members  of  one  single  church,  shows,  that  the  appli- 
cation was  very  different,  and  that  matters  were  then  on  a  very 
different  footing.  In  the  Acts  also,  it  appears  very  plain,  that 
all  the  stated  pastors  are  always  considered  as  coming  under 
one  denomination.  Thus  we  are  told  of  the  apostles  Paul  and 
Barnabas,  Acts  xiv,  23,  that,  when  journeying  together,  they 
ordained  elders,  -zs-peT^vlspai,  in  every  church.  This  is,  indeed, 
the  common  title  given  to  the  ministers  settled  in  particular 
churches  throughout  that  book.  When  a  collection  is  made 
for  the  poor  christians  in  Jerusalem,  it  is  sent  roii  zs-peT^hpt-ti § 
and  if  the  pastors  of  any  church  are  sent  for,  that  they  may  re- 
ceive proper  directions,  it  is  Tm  Ts-psa-^vlifm.  In  the  fifteenth, 
chapter,  where  we  have  an  account  of  the  consultation  held  at 
Jerusalem,  about  the  Mosaick  ceremonies,  the  ordinary  pas- 
tors are  no  less  than  five  times,  to  wit,  in  verses  2d,  4th,  6th, 
22d,  and  23d,  distinguished  by  this  appellation  from  either  the 
apostles,  or  private  christians,  or  both.  Nor  do  we  find  a  sin- 
gle hint  in  the  whole  book  of  any  thing  like  different  clas- 
ses of  iFfe<r^v]epot.  The  name  tTricmoTroi  occurs  there  but  once, 
which  is  in  the  place  above  quoted,  where  it  is  applied  to  the 
same  individuals,  who,   in  the  same  chapter,  are  termed  ar^fp- 

(ivlifot. 

In  regard  to  the  imposition  of  hands,  which  is  considered  by 
many  as  a  necessary  attendant  on  ordination,  we  find  this  also, 
1  Tim.  iv.  14,  attributed  to  the  presbytery.  The  word^perr^tt- 
Itpiov-,  though  it  occurs  sometimes  in  the  New  Testament  as  ap- 
plied to  the  Jewish  sanhedrim,  or  council  of  elders,  is  foimd 
only  in  the  passage  now  quoted,  applied  to  a  christian  council. 
The  sense  of  the  word  ■srpeT^vlcpoi,  as  well  as  the  application  of 
the  word  ia-pe(rfivltpi<»i  in  other  places,  to  a  convention  of  those 
called  ■a^peo-^vltpoi,  determines  the  sense  of  the  word  in  this  pas- 


70  LECTURES  ON 

sage.  And,  indeed,  all  christian  antiquity  concurs  in  affixing 
this  name  to  what  may  be  called  the  consistory  of  a  particular 
church,  or  tiie  college  of  its  pastors. 

It  must  be  remarked  by  every  person  who  gives  due  attention 
to  the  apostolical  writings,  that  the  custom  then,  if  not  uni- 
formly, was,  with  very  few  exceptions,  to  give  a  plurality  of 
teachers  to  every  church.  The  state  of  the  christian  commu- 
nity at  that  time,  which  consisted  almost  entirely  of  new  con- 
verts, men  and  women,  who  had  been  habituated  to  principles 
and  practices  very  different  from  those  they  were  to  be  in- 
structed in,  beside  the  more  imminent  dangers  to  which  all 
christians,  but  especially  the  pastors,  were  then  exposed,  ren- 
dered ihis  precaution  absolutely  necessar\ .  They  had,  by  this 
means,  a  probable  ground  to  expect,  that  if  some  of  the  teach- 
ers should  fall  a  sacrifice  to  the  malice  of  their  enemies,  some 
would  escape  their  fury,  and  that  in  every  church  a  timely  op- 
portunity might  thus  be  found  of  supplying  their  vacancies,  so 
that  the  congregations  should  never  be  entirely  destitute  of 
pastors. 

To  what  has  been  adduced  from  sacred  writ,  I  shall  add  two 
very  ancient  testimonies :  one  of  them  is  from  the  most  res- 
pectable remains  we  have  of  christian  antiquity  next  to  the  in- 
spired writings.  The  piece  I  allude  to,  is  the  first  epistle  of 
Clemens  Romanus  to  the  Corinthians,  as  it  is  commonly  styled, 
but  as  it  styles  itself,  the  epistle  of  the  church  of  God  at 
Rome  to  the  church  of  God  at  Corinth.  It  is  the  same  Cle- 
ment whom  Paul  (Philip,  iv,  3,)  calls  his  fellow-labourer,  and 
one  of  those  whose  names  are  in  the  book  of  life.  There  we 
are  told,  chap,  xlii,  that  "  the  apostles  having  preached  the 
*>  Gospel  in  countries  and  towns,  constituted  the  first  fruits  of 
"  their  ministry,  whom  they  approved  by  the  spirit,  bishops  and 
"  deacons  of  those  who  should  believe."  And  in  order  to  sa- 
tisfy us,  that  he  did  not  use  these  words  in  a  vague  manner  for 
church-officers  in  general,  but  as  expressive  of  all  the  distinct 
orders  that  vi^ere  established  by  them  in  the  church,  he  adds., 
*'  Nor  was  this  a  new  device,  inasmuch  as  bishops  and  deacons 
**  had  been  pointed  out  many  ages  before  ;  for  thus  says  the 
♦'  Scripture,  "  Ixuill  constitute  their  bishops  in  righteounneas  and- 
their  deacons  in  jaith^''  The  passage  quoted  is  the  last  clause 
of  the  17th  verse  of  the  6()th  chapter  of  Isaiah.  It  is  thus  ren- 
dered in  our  version  :  '•■  I  will  make  thine  officers  peace,  and 
•'  thine  exactors  righteousness."  Whether  this  venerable  an- 
cient has  given  a  just  translation,  or  made  a  proper  application 
of  this  prediction,  is  not  the  point  in  question.  It  is  enough 
that  it  evinces  what  his  notion  was  of  the  established  rainistere 
then  in  the  church.     And  if,  (as  no  critick  ever  questioned,  and 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  «! 

as  his  own  argument  necessarily  requires)  he  means  the  same 
by  bishops  with  those  who,  in  the  Acts,  are  called  ts-pis-^vjepeiiy 
whom  the  apostles  Paul  and  Barnabas  ordained  in  every  churchy 
and  whom  Clement,  in  other  parts  of  this  epistle,  also  calls 
Tsrps'r^vlepei,  namely,  the  ordinary  teachers,  it  would  seem  strange, 
that  the  bishop,  properly  so  called,  the  principal  officer  of  all, 
should  be  the  only  one  in  his  account,  of  whom  the  Holy  Spi- 
rit, in  sacred  writ,  had  given  no  previous  intimation.  Nay,  do 
not  the  words  of  this  father  manifestly  imply,  that  any  other 
office  in  the  church  than  the  two  he  had  mentioned,  might  be 
justly  styled  a  new  device  or  invention  ?  Dr.  Pearson,  in  his 
Vindicise  Ignatianae,  insists  much,  that  whenever  any  of  the 
fathers  purposely  enumerate  the  different  orders  in  the  church, 
they  mention  always  three.  If  the  above  account  given  by 
Clement  is  not  to  be  considered  as  an  enumeration,  I  kr,ow 
aot  what  to  call  it.  If  two  were  actually  all  the  orders  then 
in  the  church,  could  he  have  introduced  the  mention  of  them, 
by  telling  us  he  was  about  to  give  a  list,  or  catalogue,  or  eveti 
to  make  an  enumeration  of  the  ecclesiastical  degrees  ?  Is  this 
a  way  of  prefacing  the  mention  of  so  small  a  number  as  two  ? 
It  is  this  writer's  express  design  to  acquaint  us  what  the  apos- 
tles did  for  accommodating  the  several  churches  they  planted, 
in  pastors  and  assistants.  And  can  we  suppose  he  would  have 
omitted  the  chief  point  of  all,  namely,  that  they  supplied  eve- 
ry church  vvith  a  prelate,  ruler,  or  head,  if  any  one  had  really 
been  entitled  to  this  distinction  ? 

If  it  should  be  urged,  that  under  the  term  sTria-KOTrot  both 
functions  of  bishop  and  presbyter  are  comprehended,  it  is 
manifest,  that,  as  it  was  the  writer's  scope  to  mark  the  different 
offices  established,  as  being  predicted  by  the  prophets  in  the 
Old  Testament,  there  cannot  be  a  stronger  indication,  that 
there  was  then  no  material,  if  any  difference,  between  them, 
and  that  they  were  properly  denominated  and  considered  as 
one  office.  The  appellatives  also  by  which  they  are  denoted^ 
are  invariably  employed  by  him  in  the  plural  number,  as  being 
equally  applicable  to  all.  It  is  said  in  chap,  i,  T0/5  yiynf^sMi  u/miv 
vTTolxs^ofMvot^  submitting  to  your  governours  or  guides.  It  is 
•remarkable  also,  that  the  word  ttyafMUi,  hereused  in  the  plural 
of  all  their  pastors,  is  one  of  those  terms  which  came  after- 
wards to  be  appropriated  to  the  bishop.  Nav,  since  it  must  be 
admitted,  that  in  the  New  Testament,  as  well  as  in  the  ancient 
christian  monument  just  now  quoted,  the  words  ftr/c-xo^ro?  and 
T^pea-^vlepoi,  are  not  occasionally,  but  uniformly,  used  synony- 
.mously,  the  very  discovery,  that  there  was  not  aiiy  distinctive 
appellation  for  such  an  office  as  is  now jcalled  bishop,  is  not  of 
iii9pn§jclerable  jvei^^^^^      P^^ove,  tharXl^dici,  npt  .ex^st,;^  We 


n  LECTURES  ON 

inow  that  every  other  office,  ordinary  and  extraordinary,  is 
suSciently  distinguished  by  an  appropriated  name. 

But  1  cannot  help  observing  further  concerning  this  episde 
©f  Cieraent,  that  though  it  was  written  with  the  special  view 
of  conciliating  the  minds  of  the  Corinthians  to  their  pastors, 
commonly,  in  this  letter,  called  presbyters,  some  of  whom  the 
people  had  turned  out  of  their  offices,  or  expelled,  efxo  riis  e«-/er- 
xe/TT^i^  from  their  bishoprick,  as  his  words  literally  imply,  there 
is  not  the  most  distant  hint  of  any  superiour  to  these  irpio-^vlepoif 
iR^bose  proper  province  it  was,  if  there  had  been  such  a  supe- 
TJour,  to  inspect  their  conduct,  and  to  judge  of  it ;  and  whose 
smthoTity  the  people  had  treated  most  contemptuously  in  pre- 
suming, without  so  much  as  consulting  him,  to  degrade  their 
presbyters.  It  was  natural,  it  was  even  unavoidable,  to  take 
notice,  in  such  a  case,  of  the  usurpation  whereof  they  had 
been  guilty  upon  their  bishop,  the  chief  shepherd,  who  had 
the  oversight  of  all  the  under  shepherds  the  presbyters,  as 
well  as  of  the  people,  and  to  whom  alone,  if  there  had  been 
such  a  person,  those  presbyters  were  accountable  for  their  con- 
duct.  Yet  there  is  not  so  much  as  a  syllable  in  all  this  long 
letter  that  points  this  way.  On  the  contrary,  he  argues  from 
the  power  with  which  those  presbyters  themselves  were  vest- 
ed, and  of  which  they  could  not  be  justly  stripped,  whilst  they 
discharged  faithfully  the  duties  of  their  office.  I  will  appeal 
to  any  candid  person  who  is  tolerably  conversant  in  christian 
antiquities,  whether  he  thinks  it  possible,  that  in  the  third  cen- 
tury, such  a  letter,  on  such  an  emergence,  could  have  been 
written  to  any  christian  congregation,  by  any  man  in  his  senses, 
wherein  there  was  no  more  notice  taken  of  the  bishop,  who 
was  then,  in  a  manner,  every  thing  in  his  own  church,  than  if 
he  were  nothing  at  all.  And  that  there  was  so  great  a  differ- 
ence, in  less  than  two  centuries,  in  people^s  style  and  senti- 
laents  on  this  article,  is  an  uncontrovertible  proof,  that  in  that 
period  things  came  to  stand  on  a  very  different  foot.  This 
epistle  of  Clement,  who  was  a  disciple  of  Paul,  appears,  in- 
deed, from  one  passage,  to  have  been  written  so  early  as  before 
the  destruction  of  the  temple  at  Jerusalem,  and,  consequently, 
before  the  seventy-second  year  of  Christ,  according  to  the- 
%'ulgar  computation.  And  if  so,  it  was  written  before  the 
Apocalypse,  and,  perhaps,  some  other  parts  of  the  sacred 
canon.  Nothing,  therefore,  that  is  not  Scripture,  can  be  of 
greater  authority  in  determining  a  point  of  fact,  as  is  the  ques- 
tion about  the  constitution  of  the  apostolical  church. 

The  other  testimony  I  shall  produce  is  that  of  Polycarp, 
who  had  been  a  disciple  of  the  apostle  John,  and  must  certain- 
ly have  written  his  epistle  to  the  Philippians  a  considerable 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  73 

time  before  the  middle  of  the  second  century.  He  also  takes 
notice  only  of  two  orders  of  ministers  in  the  church,  enjoining 
the  people,  chap,  v,  to  be  subject  to  their  presbyters  and  dea- 
cons, as  to  God  and  Christ.  He  could  go  no  higher  for  a 
similitude  ;  nor  cotdd  he  decently  have  gone  so  high,  had  he 
known  of  a  higher  order  in  the  church.  Not  a  syllable  of  the 
bishop,  who,  in  less  than  a  hundred  and  fifty  years  after,  would 
have  been  the  principal,  if  not  the  only  person,  to  whom  their 
subjection  would  have  been  enjoined  by  any  christian  writer. 
Let  it  be  observed  further,  that,  though,  inchap.  v,  he  lays 
down  the  duties  and  qualifications  of  deacons,  and,  in  chap,  vi, 
those  of  presbyters,  wherein  every  thing  befitting  judges  and 
governours  is  included,  and,  through  the  whole  epistle,  those 
of  the  people,  there  is  no  mention  of  what  is  proper  in  the  cha- 
racter and  conduct  of  a  bishop. 

I  shall  remark  here,  by  the  way,  that  there  is  one  very  an- 
cient author,  Ignatius,  who  also  comes  within  the  denomina- 
tion of  the  apostolick  fathers,  whose  writings  are  supposed  to 
have  intervened,  between  those  of  Clement  and  those  of  Poly- 
carp,  and  whose  authority  is  strongly  urged  on  the  opposite 
side.  Of  him  I  shall  have  occasion  to  take  notice  afterwards. 
I  shall  here  only  add,  in  regard  to  Polycarp,  that  what  has  been 
now  observed,  of  his  epistle  to  the  Philippians,  is  a  full  confu- 
tation of  that  hasty  assertion  of  Dodweli*,  that  the  christian 
writers,  posterior  to  Ignatius,  most  accurately  observe  even  the 
distinction  of  the  names  ;  to  wit,  of  bishop  and  presbyter,  of 
which  he  had  been  speaking.  His  words  are,  "•  Juniores  au- 
"  tern  Ignatio  scriptores  christiani  et  nominum  distinctionem 
*'  observant  accuratissimara."  It  is  evident  from  the  above 
quotation,  that  Polycarp  knew  of  no  christian  minister  superi- 
our  to  the  presbyters.  If  the  bishop  was  of  a  different  order, 
and  yet  included  in  the  term,  he  has  been  as  little  observant  of 
accuracr  in  the  distinction  of  the  names,  as  of  propriety  and 
decency  in  his  injunctions  on  this  head. 

But  there  are  other  topicks  from  which  the  episcopate  has, 
by  its  warmest  patrons,  been  supported,  and  which  it  will  be 
proper  to  examine  particularly  in  the  following  lectures.  I 
shall  in  these  also  endeavour  to  trace  (as  far  as  -it  this  distance 
of  time  it  is  practicable)  the  outline  of  the  apostolick  church, 
and  inquire  into  the  origin  and  progress  of  sul)ordination  in  the 
pastors.  It  will  be  observed  by  the  judicious  and  the  candid, 
that  what  has  been  advanced  does  not  affect  the  lawfulness,  or 
even,  in  certain  circumstances,  the  expediency  of  the  episcopal 
model  J  it  only  exposes  the  arrogance  of  pretending  to  ixjus  di- 

*  Parse" .  27". 
K 


r4  LECTURES  ON 

vinum-  I  am  satisfied  that  no  form  of  polity  can  plead  such  an  ex- 
clusive charter  as  that  phrase, in  its  present  acceptation,  is  under- 
stood to  imply.  The  claim  is  clearly  the  offspring  of  sectarian 
bigotry  and  ignorance.  In  regard  to  those  polities  which  ob- 
tain at  present  in  the  different  christian  sects,  1  own  ingenuous- 
ly thdt  I  have  not  found  one  of  all  that  1  have  examined  which 
can  be  said  perfectly  to  coincide  with  the  model  of  the  aposto- 
lick  church.  Some,  indeed,  are  nearer,  and  some  are  more  re- 
mote ;  but  this  we  may  say  with  freedom,  that  if  a  particular 
form  of  polit\  had  been  essential  to  the  church,  it  had  been  laid 
down  in  another  manner  in  the  sacred  books.  The  very  hypo- 
thtsis  is,  in  my  opinion,  repugnant  to  the  spiritual  nature  of 
the  evangelical  economy.  It  savours  grossly  of  the  conceit 
with  which  the  Jews  were  intoxicated  of  the  Messiah's  secu- 
lar ki^^-'^onn  a  conceit  with  which  many  like-minded  christians 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY*  tS 


LECTURE   V. 


.AlFTER  some  considerations  on  the  nature  and  consequence 
of  the  question  about  the  polity  originally  established  in  the 
church,  I  discussed  in  the  former  lecture  the  principal  topicks 
relating  to  the  equality  of  the  pastors,  at  least  in  point  of  func- 
tion and  official  duties.  I  observed  also,  in  the  conclusion  of 
that  discourse,  that  there  were  other  topicks  from  which  those 
who  maintain  a  subordination  among  them,  have  endeavoured 
to  defend  their  sentiments.  Many,  indeed,  convinced  by  such 
arguments  as  were  then  adduced,  that  it  is  in  vain  to  search 
for  the  office  of  bishop,  as  the  word  is  understood  by  moderns, 
in  those  ministers  ordained  by  the  apostles  in  the  churches 
which  they  founded,  have  referred  us  for  its  origin  to  the  apos-* 
tolate  itself,  I  have  passingly  observed  already,  that  this  was 
One  of  those  extraordinary  offices,  which  were  in  their  nature 
temporary,  and  did  not  admit  succession.  But  this  point,  as 
so  much  stress  is  laid  upon  it,  will  deserve  to  be  examined 
more  particularly. 

The  apostles  may  be  considered  in  a  twofold  view,  either  in 
their  general  character  as  the  first  pastors  of  the  church  and 
teachers  of  the  christian  faith,  or  in  what  is  implied  in  their 
special  character,  of  apostles  of  Jesus  Christ.  In  the  first  ge- 
neral view  they  are,  doubtless,  the  predecessors  of  all  those 
who,,  to  the  end  of  the  world,  shall  preach  the  same  gospel,  and 
administer  the  same  sacraments,  by  whatever  name  we  distin- 
guish them,  bishops,  priests,  or  deacons,  overseers,  elders,  or* 
ministers.  But  the  question  still  recurs.  Whether  agreeably 
to  the  primitive  institution,  their  successors,  in  respect  of  the 
more  common  character  of  teachers  and  directors  of  the 
churches,  should  be  divided  into  three  orders,  or  only  into 
two  ?  To  presume  without  evidence,  that  the  first,  and  not  the 
second,  was  the  fact,  is  merely  what  logicians  call  2ipeiitio prin*^ 
cipii,  taking  that  for  granted,  which  is  the  very  point  in  debate. 


76  LECTURFSON 

But  if  it  be  alleged,  that  not  in  the  general  character  of  teach- 
ers, but  in  their  special  lunction  as  apostles,  the  bishops  are 
their  proper  successors,  the  presbyters  and  deacons  being  only 
the  successors  of  those  who  were, in  the  beginning,  ordained  by 
the  a])ostles,  this  j^oint  will  require  a  separate  discussion.  And 
for  this  purpose  your  attention  is  entreated  to  the  following  re- 
marks. 

First,  the  indispensable  requisites  in  an  apostle  sufficiently 
demonstrate,  that  the  office  could  be  but  temporary.  It  was 
necessary  that  he  should  be  one  who  had  seen  Jesus  Christ  in 
the  flesh  after  his  resurrection.  Accordingly  they  were  all  spe- 
cially destined  to  serve  as  eve-witnesses  to  the  world  of  this 
great  event,  the  hinge  on  which  the  truth  of  Christianity  de- 
pended. The  character  of  apostle  is  briefly  described  by 
Peter,  who  was  himself  the  first  of  the  apostolictil  college,  as 
one  ordained  to  be  a  witness  of  Christ's  resurrection.  Acts  i, 
22,  a  circumstance  of  which  he  often  makes  mention  in  his 
speeches  both  to  the  rulers  and  to  the  people.  See  Acts,  ii, 
32;  iii,  15;  v,  32  ;  x,  41  ;  xiii,  31.  And  if  so,  the  office, 
from  its  nature  and  design,  could  not  have  an  existence  after 
the  extinction  of  that  generation. 

Secondly,  the  apostles  were  distinguished  by  prerogatives 
whi<h  did  not  descend  to  any  after  them.  Of  this  kind  was, 
first,  their  receiving  their  mission  immediately  from  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  not  mediately  through  any  human  ordination  or 
appointment :  of  this  kind  also  was,  secondly,  the  power  of 
conferring,  by  imposition  of  hands,  the  miraculous  gifts  of  the 
spirit  on  whomsoever  they  would;  and,  thirdly,  the  knowledge 
they  had,  by  inspiration,  of  the  whole  doctrine  of  Christ.  It 
was  for  this  reason  thev  were  commanded  to  wait  the  fulfil- 
ment of  the  promise  which  their  Master  had  given  them,  that 
they  should  be  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost.  What  pains 
does  not  Paul  take  to  show,  that  the  above  mentioned  marks 
of  an  apostle  belonged  to  him  as  well  as  to  any  of  them  ?  That 
he  had  seen  Christ  after  his  resurrection,  and  was  consequent- 
ly qualified  as  an  eye-witness  to  attest  that  memorable  event, 
he  observes,  1  Cor.  ix,  1 ;  xv,  8  :  that  his  commission  came  di- 
rectly from  Jesus  Christ  and  God  the  Father,  without  the  in-" 
tervention  of  any  human  creature,  he  acquaints  us.  Gal.  i,  1  ; 
ii,  6.  To  his  conferrirg  miraculous  powers  as  the  signs  of  an 
apostle,  he  alludes,  2  Cor.  xii,  12  ;  and  that  he  received  the 
knowledge  of  the  Gospel  not  from  any  other  apostle,  but  by 
immediate  inspiration,  Gal.  i,  11,  &c. 

1  hirdly,  their  mission  was  of  quite  a  different  kind  from 
that  of  any  ordinary  pastor.  It  was  to  propagate  the  Gospel 
throughout  the  world,  both  among  Jews  and  Pagans,  and  not 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  7? 

to  take  the  charge  of  a  particular  flock.  The  terms  of  their 
commission  are,  "  Go  and  teach  all  nations."  Again  ;  "  Go 
"  ye  into  all  the  •vrorld,  and  preach  the  Gospel  to  every  crea- 
*'  ture."  No  doubt  they  may  be  styled  bishops  or  overseers, 
but  in  a  sense  very  different  from  that  in  which  it  is  applied  to 
the  inspector  over  the  inhabitants  of  a  particular  district. 
They  were  universal  bishops  ;  the  v/hole  church,  or  rather, 
the  whole  earth  was  their  charge,  and  they  were  all  colleagues 
one  of  another.     Or  to  give  the  same  sentiment,  in  the  words 

of   ChrySOStOm,  Ecriv  otto  S-sa  %f/^o?av^S-£v7£?  XT^-oTJcXot   ctpp/ov']ii.   iiK.   s!hn', 

"  The  apostles  were  constituted  ot  God,  rulers,  not  each  over 
*'•  a  separate  nation  or  city,  but  all  were  intrusted  with  the 
"  world  in  common."  If  so,  to  have  limited  themselves  to 
any  thing  less,  would  have  been  disobedience  to  the  express 
command  thev  had  received  from  their  Master,  to  go  into  atl 
nations,  and  to  preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature.  If,  in  the 
latter  part  of  the  lives  of  any  of  them,  they  were,  through 
age  and  infirmities,  confined  to  one  place,  that  place  would 
naturally  fall  under  the  immediate  inspection  of  such.  And 
this,  if  even  so  much  as  this,  is  all  that  has  given  rise  to  the 
tradition,  (for  there  is  nothing  like  historical  evidence  in  the 
case)  that  any  of  them  were  bishops  or  pastors  of  particular 
churches.  Nay,  in  some  instances,  it  is  plain,  that  the  tradi- 
tion has  originated  from  this  single  circumstance,  that  the  first 
pastors,  in  such  a  church,  were  appointed  by  such  an  apostlt. 
Hence  it  has  arisen,  that  the  bishops  of  different  churches 
have  claimed  (and,  probably,  with  equal  truth)  to  be  the  suc- 
cessours  of  the  same  apostle. 

Fourthly  and  lastly,  as  a  full  proof  that  the  matter  was  thus 
universally  understood,  both  in  their  own  age,  and  in  the  times 
immediately  succeeding,  no  one,  on  the  death  of  an  apostle, 
was  ever  substituted  in  his  room,  and  w^hen  that  orisrinal  sacred 
college  was  extinct,  the  title  became  extinct  with  it.  The 
election  of  Matthias  by  the  apostles,  in  the  room  of  Judas,  is 
no  exception,  as  it  was  previous  to  their  entering  on  their 
charge.  They  knew  it  was  their  Master's  intention,  that 
twelve  missionaries,  from  among  those  who  had  attended  his 
ministry  on  the  earth,  should  be  employed  as  ocular  witnesses. 
to  attest  his  resurrection,  on  which  the  divinitv  of  his  religion 
depended.  The  words  ot  Peter,  on  this  occasion,  are  an 
ample  confirmation  of  all  that  has  been  said^  both  in  regard  to 
the  end  of  the  office,  and  the  qualifications  requisite  in  the 
person  who  fills  it,  at  the  same  time  that  they  afl'ord  a  demon- 
stration of  the  absurdity  as  well  as  arrogance  of  modern  pre- 
tenders.    "  Wherefore  of  these  men   which   have  companied 


rs  LECTURES  ON 

"  with  us  all  the  time  that  the  Lord  Jesus  went  in  and  out 
"  among  us,  beginning  from  the  baptism  of  John,  unto  that 
"  same  day  that  he  was  taken  up  from  us,  must  one  be  ordain- 
*'  ed  to  be  a  witness  with  us  of  his  resurrection."  But  after- 
wards, when  the  apostle  James,  the  brother  of  John,  was  put 
to  death  by  Herod,  as  recorded  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles, 
we  find  no  mention  made  of  a  successour.  Nor  did  the  subse* 
quent  admission  of  Paul  and  Barnabas  to  the  apostleship  form 
any  exception  from  what  has  been  adyanced  ;  for  they  came 
not  as  successours  to  any  one,  but  were  specially  called  by  the 
Holy  Spirit  as  aposdes,  particularly  to  the  Gentiles  ;  and  in 
them  also  were  found  tht  qualifications  requisite  for  the  testi- 
mony which,  as  apostles,  they  were  to  give. 

It  is  a  similar  subterfuge  to  recur  to  any  of  the  other  extra- 
ordinary minir-ters  who  wtre  at  that  time  in  the  church.  It 
holds  true  of  them  all  slike,  that  their  office  was  temporary, 
and  the  charge  they  had  was  univ-ersal :  it  extended  to  the 
whole  church.  Of  this  kind  evidently  was  the  office  of  evan- 
gelist, a  title  which,  like  apostle,  fell  v/iih  those  who  first  en- 
joyed it.  Such  ■was  Philip,  such  was  Timothy,  and  such  cer- 
tainly was  also  Titus*  The  last  mentioned,  I  own  is  no 
where  expressly  called  so.  Bat  from  a  proper  attention  to 
what  we  learn  concerning  him  and  limoihy,  both  in  the  Acts 
of  the  A-postles,  and  in  Paul's  epistles,  we  find  their  situa- 
tions, services,  and  trusts,  so  perfectly  to  correspond,  that  we 
cannot  hesitate  a  moment  in  affirming  that  their  f;mctions 
were  the  same,  and  that  they  both  served  as  assistants  to  the 
apostle  Paul.  Such,  also,  probabh ,  were  Mark  and  Luke.  I 
do  not  here  allude  to  the.  right  they  acquired  to  this  title  from 
the  gospels  which  thev  wrote,  but  as  due  to  them  from  having 
assisted  some  of  the  apostles  in  that  capacity.  Luke  was  long 
the  companion  of  Paul  ;  Mark  is  said  to  have  attended  Peter. 
And  if  he  was  a  different  person  from  this  evangelist  (about 
which  some  have  doubted)  John,  surnamed  Mark,  ought  also 
to  be  included,  who  for  some  time  attended  the  apostles  Paul 
and  Barnabas,  and  after  their  separation,  Barnabas. 

The  work  of  an  evangelist  appears  to  have  been  to  attend 
the  apostles  in  their  journeys  for  the  promulgation  of  the  gos- 
pel, to  assist  them  in  the  office  of  preaching,  especially  in  places 
which  the  gospel  had  not  reached  before.  This  conveys  the 
true  distinction  between  the  (ireek  v^ords  x'.;pvG-(reiv and evxyye?Ki^£iv., 
from  which  last  the  nam.e  evangelist  is  taken.  The  former 
signifies  to  preach  in  generjil,  or  proclaim  the  reign  of  the 
Messiah  ;  the  Litter,  the igh  freqiiently  rendered  in  the  same 
wr?y,  denotes,  properlv,  to  declare  the  good  news,  that  is,  the 
gospel,  to  those  who  had  before  known  nothing  of  the  matter. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  79 

The  evangelists  assisted  also  in  settling  the  churches,  always 
acting  under  the  direction  oi  the  apostles,  and  bearing  messages 
from  them  to  those  congregations  vvhiijh  the  apostles  could 
not  then  personally  visit,  serving  to  supply  their  places  in  re- 
forming abuses,  and  settling  order.  But  the  whole  history  ma- 
nifestly proves,  that  their  superintendenc) ,  in  pariicuiar  places, 
was  not  stationary,  and  for  life,  but  occasional  and  ambula- 
tory. The  words  of  Paul  to  Titus  clearly  show  thus  much. 
"  For  this  cause  left  I  thee  in  Crete,  that  thou  shouldst  set  in 
*'  order  the  things  that  are  wanting,  and  ordain  elders  in  every 
"  city,  as  I  appointed  thee."  This  is  not  the  language  of  one 
who  had  assigned  him  this  as  his  fixed  station,  bat  of  one  who 
had  intrusted  him  with  the  execution  of  x  special  purpose, 
which  the  apostle  could  not  then  execute  himself;  and  vvhich, 
when  Titus  had  executed,  the  sole  intention  of  his  presence 
there  was  accomplished.  But  that  they  remained  still  in  their 
extraordinary  character  of  evangelists,  and  were  still  under 
the  direction  of  those  apostles  whom  they  assisted  in  that 
capacity,  appears  also  from  this,  that  Paul  enjoins  Fimothy  to 
make  dispatch,  in  regard  to  the  matters  he  was  charged  with  in 
Asia,  that  he  might  be  with  him  in  Rome  before  the  winter. 
As  to  Titus,  he  orders  him  to  meet  him  at  Nicopolis,  in  Ma- 
cedonia, where  he  intended  to  pass  the  winter  ;  and  afterwards, 
he  writes  to  Timothy,  (for  the  second  epistle  to  Timothy  was 
posterior  to  the  epistle  to  Titus)  that  Titus  was  gone  to 
Dalmatia. 

As  to  the  dates  or  postscripts  subjoined  to  the  epistles  in  the 
common  bibles,  it  is  universally  agreed,  among  the  learned, 
that- they  are  of  no  authority.  They  are  not  found  in  some  of 
our  best  and  most  ancient  manuscripts  :  they  are  not  the  same 
in  all  copies,  and  some  of  them  are  evidently  false.  The  time 
in  which  they  have  been  annexed,  is  not  thought  to  have  been 
earlier  than  the  fifth  century.  We  know  how  far  at  that  time  a 
species  of  vanity  carried  people,  to  trace  the  line  of  their  pas- 
tors upwards,  through  a  very  dark  period,  to  apostles  and 
evangelists,  supplying,  by  their  guesses,  the  imperfections  of 
tradition.  Certain  it  is,  that  in  the  three  first  centuries,  nei- 
ther Timothy  nor  Titus  is  styled  bishop  by  any  writer.  It 
also  deserves  to  be  remarked,  that  in  the  island  of  Crete,  of 
which  Titus  is  said,  in  the  postscript  of  Paul's  epistle  to  him, 
to  have  been  ordained  the  first  bishop,  there  were  no  fewer, 
according  to  the  earliest  accounts  and  catalogues  extant,  than 
eleven  bishops.  Hence  it  is  that  Titus  has  been  called  by  some 
of  the  later  fathers  an  archbishop  ;  though  few  of  the  warmest 
friends  of  episcopacy  pretend  to  give  the  archiepiscopal  order 
so  early  a  date.     Yet  it  is  not  without  some  colour  of  reason 


80  LECTURES  ON  * 

that  they  have  named  him  so;  since  he  was  appointed  to  or- 
dain elders  in  every  eity,  and  hud  therefore  a  superintendency 
for  the  time  over  the  whole  island.  Whereas  it  is  well  known, 
that  in  the  earliest  times  of  episcopacy,  every  city  wherein 
there  was  a  church,  that  is,  wherein  there  were  christian  con- 
verts enow,  hud  its  own  bishop.  Now  if  such  was  the  case 
with  Titus,  he  enjoyed  an  office  there  in  which  he  had  no  suc- 
cession J  since  in  all  the  ancient  history  of  the  church,  after  the 
death  of  the  extraordinary  ministers,  till  the  rise  of  the  metro- 
political  jurisdiction,  whiwh  was  near  two  centuries  afterwards, 
the  bishop  of  a  single  congregation  Avas  the  highest  order 
known  in  the  church.  But  our  adversaries  in  this  question  do 
not  reflect,  that  b)-  making  him  a  metropolitan,  they  deprive 
themselves  of  the  only  plausible  account  that  has  been  given 
on  their  side,  why  he  got  no  directions  concerning  the  conse- 
cration of  bishops,  namely,  that  he  himself  was  the  bishop. 
For  being  in  that  island,  by  their  hypothesis  archbishop,  he  had 
se\'eral  suiTragans  of  the  episcopal  order,  in  whose  ordination 
alone  he  was  immediately  concerned.  The  ordaining  of  pres- 
byters and  deacons  was  properly  their  work,  and  not  his. 
Paul,  on  that  supposition,  omitted  to  give  him  instructions  on 
the  only  point  in  which  he  had  a  concern.  This  holds  still 
more  evidently  in  regard  to  Timothy,  whom  the  same  persons 
have  made  primate,  or  rather  patriarch,  of  the  proconsular 
Asia,  wherein  there  were  many  bishops.  What  excuse  will 
their  ingenuity  invent  for  this  repeated  oversight  of  the  apos- 
tle, in  mentioning  only  two  orders  instead  of  three  ?  Indeed, 
so  little  can  the  instructions,  given  by  Paul  to  Timothy  and 
Titus,  be  made  to  quadrate  with  any  ordinary  ministry  that 
ever  obtained  in  the  church,  that  we  are  forced  to  conclude 
with  the  learned  Dr.  Whitby,  (see  his  preface  to  the  epistle  to 
Titus)  that  theirs  was  extraordinary  as  well  as  temporary, 
and  that  they  were  not  succeeded  in  it  by  any  that  came  after 
them.  But  if  we  must  have  successours  to  those  extraordinary 
missionaries,  why  do  we  not  retain  both  their  titles  and  their 
ofSces  ?  And  why  have  we  not  successours  to  them  all?  Why 
have  we  not  still  our  apostles,  and  evangelists,  and  prophets,  and 
governments,  and  tongues,  and  interpreters,  and  miracles,  and 
discerncrs  of  spirits,  as  well  as  they  ?  This  would  be  no  more 
than  the  native  consequence  of  that  principle,  that  we  must 
have  something  corresponding  and  successive  to  offices  which 
were  then,  by  the  wisdom  of  God,  judged  necessary  for  the 
subversion  of  idolatry,  and  the  first  publication  of  the  faith. 

It  is  of  as  lit'de  weight  to  urge,  that  committing  the  charge 
of  ordaining  presbyters  and  deacons  to  those  extraordinary 
ministers,  Timothy  and  Titus,  was  an  evidence  that  there  was 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  81 

no  such  power  in  the  pressbyters  or  bishops,  as  they  are  also 
called,  who  had  been  ordained  in  those  places  before.  But 
how  does  it  appear,  that  there  had  been  any  ordained  in  the 
churches  to  which  their  charge  then  extended  ?  The  congre- 
gations, as  was  hinted  already,  for  some  time  left  under  the 
tutelage  of  those  extraordinary  ministers,  the  prophets  and 
wise  men  who  happened  to  be  among  them.  1  he  first  men- 
tion that  is  made  of  the  ordination,  or  settlement  of  eiders  in 
every  city,  is  in  the  fourteenth  chapter  of  the  Acts,  whereas 
many  thousands  had  been  converted  to  Christianity  in  dif- 
ferent places  long  before.  And  that  some  oi  the  churches 
to  which  Paul's  epistles  were  directed,  had  no  fixed  ministry! 
is  evident  from  the  tenour  of  the  epistles  themselves,  parti- 
cularly from  those  written  to  the  Corinthians.  Now  the 
directions  given  to  both  Timothy  and  Titus  clearly  show, 
that  they  relate  to  the  planting  of  churches,  by  supplying  for 
the  first  time,  with  stated  pastors,  those  converts  who  had 
none  before.  This  must  have  been  done  b)'  the  extraordi- 
nary ministers,  if  it  was  ever  to  be  done  at  all.  But  when 
that  was  once  effected,  no  other  than  ordinary  means,  to 
which  the  pastors  to  be  ordained  were  equal,  were  requi- 
site for  the  supply  of  occasional  vacancies,  and  for  preserving 
an  order  once  established.  Accordingly,  the  ex^rcution  of 
the  charge  which  Paul  gave  to  Timothy,  whereof  the  plant- 
ing of  churches,  by  supplying  them  with  pastors,  was  a  prin- 
cipal part,  he  denominates  doing  the  work,  not  of  a  bishop, 
but  of  an  evangelist,  and  fulfilling  that  ministry.  Aaron,  the 
first  high  priest  under  the  former  dispensation,  and  after  him 
Eleazar  his  son,  were  solemnly  consecrated  by  Moses,  who 
was  an  extraordinary  minister,  in  as  much  as  he  was  the 
steward  and  sole  superintendent  over  the  house  of  God.  But 
was  this  ever  understood  to  imply,  that  no  succeeding  priest, 
and  especially  no  succeeding  high  priest,  could  be  legally 
consecrated  by  any  who  was  inferiour  in  ofhce  to  Moses  ? 
Had  that  been  the  case,  the  priesthood  niust  have  expired 
with  that  generation.  Moses,  in  his  exalted  station,  had  no 
successor.  And  till  the  coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
it  might  be  justly  said,  "  There  arose  not  a  prophet  since  in 
"  Israel,  like  unto  Moses,  whom  the  Lord  knew  face  to  face." 
It  was  necessary  indeed  that  he  should  lay  the  foundation  of 
the  Israelitish  church,  but  that  he  should  raise  the  super- 
structure was  not  necessary.  To  effect  this  was  left  to  mean- 
er hands.  And  the  priesthood,  once  established,  was  suffi- 
cient of  itself  for  filling  up  the  voids  that  iTiight  be  made  by 
death,  and  other  accidents.  And  it  is  reasonable  to  think, 
that  the  case,  in  this  respect,  would  not  be  similar  with  the 

L 


k  LECTtTRE^bS 

church  of  Christ?  Hence  it  is  evident,  that  all  the  arguments, 
in  favour  of  the  distinction,  v/hich  are  brought  by  Epiphanius» 
and  others,  from  some  passages  in  the  epistles  to  Timothy  and 
Titus,  being  built  on  a  false  hypothesis,  must  fall  to  the  ground. 
They  proceed  upon  the  notion,  that  these  were  properly  bi- 
shops in  the  modern  acceptation  ;  a  notion  utterly  unknown  to 
that  christian  antiquity,  which  alone  deserves  the  name  of  pri- 
jnitive  ;  a  notion,  besides,  incompatible  with  the  authentick  ac- 
counts we  have  concerning  these  extraordinary  ministers,  who 
\vere  not  made  bishops  till  about  five  hundred  years  after  their 
death. 

There  is  only  one  other  plea  of  any  consequence  in  favour 
of  the  apostolical  antiquity  of  episcopacy,  which  I  shall  now 
examine,  I  have  reserved  it  for  the  last,  because  it  affords  an 
excellent  handle  for  inquiring  into  the  real  origin  of  subordi- 
nation among  the  christian  pastors.  The  plea  I  mean  is  taken 
from  the  epistles  to  the  seven  Asian  churches  in  the  Apoca- 
lypse, addressed  to  the  angels  of  these  churches  severally,  and 
in  the  singular  number ;  to  the  angel  of  the  church  of  Ephe- 
sus,  and  so  of  the  rest.  It  appears  from  the  first  chapter  of 
that  book,  that  each  epistle  is  intended  for  all  the  church  or 
congregation  mentioned  in  the  direction  or  superscription. 
But  one  person,  called  the  angel  of  that  church,  is  addressed 
in  name  of  the  whole.  This  is  evidently  different  from  the 
uniform  style  both  of  the  Acts  of  the  apostles  and  of  Paul's 
epistles.  In  them,  as  we  have  seen,  the  pastors  in  every 
church  are  always  spoken  of  in  the  plural  number.  The  same 
titles  are  used  promiscuously  of  all,  (except  the  deacons)  as  of 
persons  quite  co-ordinate  in  power  and  trust.  Here,  on  the 
contrary,  the  singular  number  is  used,  and  a  name  given  which 
is  not  commonly  applied  to  those  in  the  ministry,  ordinary  or 
extraordinary.  Angel  properly  denotes  messenger  or  ambas- 
sadour,  It  is  the  name  usually  assigned  to  the  celestial  spirits, 
as  expressive  of  the  relation  they  stand  in  to  God.  The  infer- 
nal spirits  are,  in  like  manner,  called  the  devil's  angels.  It  is 
sometimes  also  used  of  men.  Thus  it  is  predicted  in  scripture 
concerning  John  the  baptist : — "  Behold,  I  send  my  angel  be- 
*'  fore  thee,  who  shall  prepare  thy  way."  But  what  shall  we 
say  of  the  import  of  the  expression  in  that  part  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse now  referred  to?  Shall  we, withmany,considerthisunusual 
application  of  a  name,  and  the  adopting  of  the  singular  num- 
ber in  reference  to  the  sacred  office,  though  but  in  one  single 
book,  and  that  a  very  mysterious  and  prophetical  book,  as  a 
sufficient  counterpoise  to  all  the  arguments  in  favour  of  the  co- 
ordination of  the  pastors,  taken  from  the  uniform  style  of  the 
plain  and  historical  part  of  scripture,  which  informs  us  of  the 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  &^ 

planting  of  churches  ;  and  from  the  familiar  epistles  of  the 
apostles  to  those  churches  that  had  been  planted,  or  to  their  as- 
sistants in  the  ministry?  I  do  not  think,  that  by  any  just  rule 
of  interpretation  we  can.  This  would  be  not  to  borrow  light 
from  the  perspicuous  passages,  in  order  to  dispel  the  darkness, 
of  the  obscure,  but  to  confound  the  light  of  the  clearest  pas- 
sages, by  blending  it  with  the  obscurity  of  the  darkest. 

Shall  we  then  maintain  with  some  zealous  patrons  of  the 
presbytei'ian  model,  that  in  the  sublime  and  allegorical  style  of 
prophecy,  a  community  is  here  personified  and  addressed  as 
one  man  ?  Shall  v/e  affirm,  that  by  the  angel  is  meant  the  pres- 
bytery, which  our  Lord,  the  better  to  express  the  union  that 
ought  to  subsist  among  the  members,  emphatically  considers 
as  one  person  ?  With  this  interpretation  I  am  equally  dissatis- 
fied. It  is  indeed  evident,  that  each  of  these  epistles  is  ulti- 
mately intended  for  the  congregation.  The  faults  reprehend- 
ed are  therefore  to  be  understood  as  the  faults  not  of  the  mini- 
ster or  ministers  peculiarly,  but  as  the  faults  that  predominated 
among  the  people,  and  with  which  both  the  pastors  and  the  flock 
are  more  or  less  chargeable  5  and  the  warnings  and  admoni- 
tions, as  given  to  them  all.  Accordingly,  when  there  is  a  ne- 
cessity of  distinguishing  the  conduct  of  some  from  that  of 
others,  the  plural  number  is  adopted  as  in  chap,  ii,  v.  10  :— ^ 
*'  Behold,  the  devil  shall  cast  some  of  you  into  prison,  that  yoU 
*'  may  be  tried.'*  See  also  verses  13,  23,  24,  and  25.  But  to  un- 
derstand by  the  name  angel  another  community,  namely^  that 
of  the  pastors,  appears  to  me  an  unnatural  supposition^  which 
does  violence  to  the  text.  Though  we  have  instances,  especi* 
ally  in  precepts  and  denunciations,  wherein  a  community  is 
addressed  by  the  singular  pronouns  thou  and  thee^  I  do  not  re- 
collect such  an  use  of  an  appellative  as  the  application  of  the 
word  angelhtvQ  Would  be,  on  the  hypothesis  of  those  interpre- 
ters. But  is  there  no  medium  ?  Must  the  angel  of  each  church 
here  addressed  be  of  an  order  diifering  from  that  of  the  other 
ministers,  and  superiour  to  it,  or  must  it  imply  their  collec- 
tive body  ?  To  me  an  intermediate  opinion^  which  has  been 
adopted  by  some  criticks,  appears  much  more  probable  than  ei» 
ther.  My  sentiment  therefore  is,  that,  as  in  their  consistories 
and  congregations,  it  would  be  necessary,  for  the  sake  of  order^ 
that  one  should  preside,  both  in  the  offices  of  religion,  and  in 
iheir  consultations,  for  the  common  good,  it  is  their  president 
pr  chairman  that  is  here  addressed  under  the  name  of  angeL 
A  regulation  of  this  kind  all  sorts  of  societies  are  led  to  adopt 
from  necessity,  in  order  to  prevent  confusion  in  conducting  bu- 
siness ;  and  those  christian  societies  would  also  fall  into  it  by 
example;     They  had  adopted  the   name  ^p£<r^vlsfi»v  presbyterv 


84  LECTURES  ON 

or  senate,  from  the  name  frequently  given  to  the  Jewish  san- 
hedrim. The  term  Trpfa-S'fTfp®-,  elder  or  senator,  they  had  also 
borrowed  from  the  title  given  to  the  members  of  that  council. 
Nothing  could  be  more  natural,  than  to  derive  from  that  court 
also  the  practice  of  conducting  their  affairs  more  decently  and 
expeditiously  by  the  help  of  a  president. 

Let  it  not  be  imagined  that  I  mean  to  signify,  that  the  pres- 
bytery was  formed  on  the  model  of  the  sanhedrim,  because 
they  adopted  the  same  name.  This,  far  from  being  necessary, 
is  not  even  probable.  Their  difFerent  uses  and  purposes  must 
suggest  the  propriety  of  many  differences  in  their  structure 
iand  procedure.  But  on  the  first  erection  of  this  christian  se- 
nate, or  council,  they  could  hardly  fail  to  take  as  much  of  the 
form  of  the  Jewish,  as  was  manifestly  of  equal  convenience  in 
both.  It  still  adds  to  the  probability  of  this,  that  in  the  syna- 
gogue from  which  many  of  the  terms  used  in  the  church  in 
those  early  times  were  borrowed,  he  who  presided  in  conduct- 
ing the  worship  and  in  directing  the  reading  of  the  law,  was 
styled  the  angel  of  the  congregation. 

An  example  they  likewise  had  in  the  apostolical  college 
itself,  in  which  Peter  appears,  by  the  appointment  of  his  mas- 
ter to  have  presided  ;  though  in  no  other  particular  was  he 
endowed  with  any  power  or  privilege  not  conferred  on  the 
rest,  who  were,  in  respect  of  apostleship,  his  colleagues  and 
equals.  I  shall  not  detain  you  v/ith  entering  into  the  contro- 
versy that  has  been  so  much  laboured  between  protestants  and 
papists,  and  of  the  latter,  between  some  more  and  some  less 
papistical,  in  regard  to  the  prerogatives  of  Peter.  I  think  it 
has  been  made  sufficiently  manifest,  that  there  was  not  any 
kind  of  power  conferred  on  him,  in  which  his  fellow-apostles 
were  not  sharers  with  him.  He  is  indeed  made  a  principal 
foundation  of  the  church  *  ;  but  they  also  are  foundations  -j*  ; 
for  the  house  of  God  is  built  on  the  foundation  of  the  apostles 
and  prophets  ;  and  on  the  twelve  foundations  of  the  wall  of 
the  new  Jerusalem  were  inscribed  the  names  of  the  twelve 
apostles ;}..  The  power  of  binding  and  loosing,  that  is,  of 
pronouncing,  without  danger  of  errour,  the  sentence  of  God 
hi  either  retaining  or  remitting  sins,  was  indeed  first  conferred 
upon  Peter  11,  but  afterwards,  as  we  learn  in  other  passages, 
particularly  from  the  apostle  John  **,  on  all  the  eleven.  Yet  I 
think  it  would  be  putting  a  forced  construction  on  the  words 
used  by  Christ,  when  Peter  first  professed  his  faith  in  him  as 
the  Messiah,  and  had  his  name  changed  from  Simon  to  Ce- 

•  Mat.  xvi.  18.  t  Eph.  ii.SO.  jj.  Rev.  xxi.  14. 

y  Mat.  ivi.  19.  *"■  Matt,  sviii.  18;  John  xi.  23. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  85 

phas,  or  Peter,  that  is,  Rock  ;  to  affirm,  that  they  convey  to 
this  apostle  no  pre-eminence  or  distinction  whatever.  For 
though  we  are  taught  from  scripture  to  consider  the  declara- 
tions made  to  Peter  as  being  also  applicable  to  them  all,  still 
they  are  to  be  regarded  as  most  eminently  applicable  to  him, 
to  whom,  in  the  singular  number,  our  Lord,  in  the  audience 
of  the  rest,  addressed  himself  in  this  manner  :  "  I  say  to  ihee,'* 
— and  "  I  will  give  to  thee."  The  confession  which  Peter 
made  was  doubtless  the  confession  of  them  all.  They  were 
therefore  all  made  partakers  of  the  same  benefits.  But  as 
Peter's  zeal  had  led  him  to  be,  as  it  were,  their  mouth,  in 
making  this  profession  to  his  master,  Christ,  after  the  effusion 
of  the  spirit,  honoured  him  to  be  their  mouth  also,  in  first 
preaching  this  doctrine,  and  giving  testimony  for  him  to  the 
Jews,  and  afterwards,  by  the  special  call  of  God,  to  the  uncir- 
cumcised  Gentiles.  It  is  thus  this  apostle  himself  speaks  of 
it: — "Brethren,  ye  know  that  God  made  choice  among  us, 
*'  that  the  Gentiles,  by  my  mouth,  should  hear  the  word  of  the 
*'  gospel."  This  is  called,  in  another  place,  "  opening  the 
"  door  of  faith  to  the  Gentiles,"  and  affords  a  natural  exposi- 
tion of  Christ's  declaration  to  Peter,  "  I  give  thee  the  kevs 
"  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  Yet  even  here  there  is  nothing 
peculiar  given  to  Peter,  but  merely  that  he  should  be  honour- 
ed to  be  the  first.  In  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles  after- 
wards, Paul  was  incomparably  more  eminent  than  he. 

That  Peter  however  was  considered  as  the  president  of 
that  college,  appears  from  several  particulars.  One  is,  he  is 
not  only  always  named  first  in  the  gospels,  and  in  the  Acts, 
but  by  Matthew,  who  Vv'as  also  an  apostle,  he  is  called  lipa?®-, 
the  firsts  which  I  imagine  is  equivalent  to  president  or  chief. 
Tifaroi  '2,if4.a¥, — the  first  Simon.  It  is  not  the  adverb  Tpaltv,  that 
is  used  here,  which  would  have  barely  implied,  that  the  histo- 
rian began  with  his  name,  but  the  adjective  or  epithet  w^*?*?- 
This  is  the  more  remarkable,  that  he  was  not  first  called  to  the 
apostleship,  for  his  brother  Andrew  was  called  before  him,  as 
we  learn  from  the  gospel  of  John.  There  is  hardly  therefore 
any  other  sense,  than  that  now  given,  that  can  be  put  upon  the 
expression.  Sometimes  when  the  apostles  are  spoken  of, 
Peter  alone  is  named.  Thus  :  "  Tell  his  disciples  and  Peter." 
I  acknowledge,  however,  that  as  another  reason  may  be  as- 
signed for  the  distinction  that  is  made  in  this  passage,  very 
little  stress  can  be  laid  on  it.  Again  :  "  Peter  stood  up  with 
"  the  eleven."  "  They  said  to  Peter  and  the  rest  of  the  apos- 
*'  ties."  And  of  the  three  whom  our  Lord,  on  some  occasions, 
distinguished  from  the  rest,  honouring  them  to  be  witnesses 
of  his  transfiguration,  his  raising  from  the  dead  Jairus's  daugh- 


«6  LECTURES  ON 

ter,  and  his  agony  in  the  garden,  Peter  is  not  only  one,  but 
invariably  named  first.  Paul  indeed  once,  in  mentioning 
those  three,  arranges  them  otherwise,  (Gal.  ii.  9,)  James^ 
Cephas^  and  yohn.  It  appears,  however,  from  this  very  pas- 
sage, that  Paul  considered  him  as  the  head  of  the  twelve. 
When  he  says  the  gospel  of  the  circumcision  was  committed 
to  Peter,  it  is  evident  that  he  is  particularized  by  way  of  emi- 
nence, for  no  person  can  doubt  that  Peter  had  this  ministry  in 
common  with  the  other  eleven.  And  in  taking  notice  of  the 
success  of  the  gospel  among  the  Jews,  Peter  alone  is  again 
named  as  the  great  instrument  God  had  employed  for  that 
purpose.  And  in  another  place,  he  mentions  his  own  visit  to 
the  mother  church  at  Jerusalem,  as  made  peculiarly  to  Peter, 
with  whom  he  abode  fifteen  days.  These,  I  acknowledge, 
are  but  slight  circumstances  taken  severally,  but  taken  in  con- 
junction, they  are  strong  enough  for  supporting  all  that  I 
intend  to  build  vipon  them.  For  nothing  is  here  ascribed  to 
him  as  peculiar  but  the  presidentship,  or  the  first  place  in  the 
discharge  of  the  functions  of  an  apostle  common  to  them  all. 
He  was  not  among  the  apostles  as  a  father  among  his  children, 
of  a  different  rank,  and  of  a  superiour  order,  but  as  an  elder 
brother  among  his  younger  brothers,  the  first  of  the  same  rank 
and  order.  "  Be  not  you  called  rabbi,"  said  Jesus  to  the 
twelve,  some  time  after  the  honourable  declaration  made  tO 
Peter,  "  for  one  is  your  master,  even  Christ,  and  all  you  arc 
*'  brethren  ;  and  call  no  man  your  father  upon  the  earth,  for 
"  one  is  your  father  who  is  in  heaven."  It  is  perhaps  unneces- 
sary to  add,  that  whatever  was  conferred  on  Peter  was  merely 
personal,  and  could  descend  to  none  after  him.  This  indeed 
is  an  unavoidable  consequence  of  another  point,  that  the  apos- 
tolate  itself  was  personal,  and  did  not  admit  succession,  which 
I  have  proved  to  you  in  the  the  preceding  part  of  this  discourse. 
As  to  Dodwell's  notion  of  the  presidency  of  the  apostle  James, 
the  son  of  Alpheus,  otherwise  James  the  less,  also  called  the 
Lord's  brother,  and  supposed  to  have  been  the  first  bishop  of 
Jerusalem,  and  likewise  of  the  temporary  primacy,  first  of  the 
church  of  Jerusalem,  afterwards  of  the  church  of  Ephesus,  X 
have  taken  notice  of  both  in  another  place. 

Some  keen  controvertists  on  the  protestant  side  would  be 
apt  to  censure  what  has  been  now  advanced  in  regard  to  the 
apostle  Peter,  as  yielding  too  much  to  the  Romanist.  Yet  ia 
fact  nothing  at  all  is  yielded.  The  bishop  of  Rome  has  no  more 
claim  to  be  the  successor  of  Peter,  than  the  bishop  of  London 
has,  or  indeed  any  pastor  in  the  church.  It  is  but  too  com- 
monly the  effect,  though* a  very  bad  effect,  of  religious  contro- 
versy, that  impartiality  and  even  judgment  are  laid  aside  by 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  Sf 

both  parties,  and  each  considers  it  as  his  glory  to  contradict  the 
other  as  much,  and  to  recede  from  his  sentiments  as  far,  as 
possible.  One  is  afraid  of  every  thing  that  looks  like  conces- 
sion :  it  is  like  losing  ground  in  a  battle,  For  when  once  un- 
happily the  controversial  spirit  has  gotten  possession  of  a  man, 
his  object  is  no  longer  truth  but  victory.  Against  this  evil  I 
would  warn  you,  my  young  friends,  as  much  as  possible.  Re- 
vere truth  above  all  things  wherever  you  find  it.  Attend  cool- 
ly and  candidly  to  the  voice  of  reason,  from  what  quarter  so- 
ever it  comes.  Let  not  the  avenues  to  your  understanding  be 
choked  up  with  prejudices  and  prepossessions,  but  be  always 
open  to  conviction. 

Now,  though  what  has  been  advanced  in  regard  to  the  apos* 
tolate  should  not  be  deemed  sufficiently  established,  yet  that 
one,  on  account  either  of  seniority,  or  of  superiour  merit,  ha- 
bitually presided  in  the  presbytery,  will  still  remain  probable, 
for  the  other  reasons  assigned,  the  obvious  conveniency  of  thfr 
thing,  the  commonness  of  it  in  all  sorts  of  councils  and  conven- 
tions ;  particularly  in  the  sanhedrim  and  synagogue,  the  only- 
rational  account  that,  in  a  consistency  with  other  parts  of  sacred 
writ,  or  with  any  christian  relicks  of  equal  antiquity,  can  be  gi.^ 
yen  of  the  address,  in  the  singular  number,  to  the  pastors  of 
the  seven  churches  severally  in  the  Apocalypse  ;  and  I  may 
add,  the  most  plausible  account  which  it  affords  of  the  origin 
of  the  more  considerable  distinction  that  afterwards  obtained 
between  bishop  and  presbyter.  The  whole  of  life  shows  us, 
that  from  the  most  trivial  causes  the  greatest  effects  sometimes 
proceed.  History  in  particular  evinces  this  truth,  and  no  sort 
of  history  more  remarkably  than  the  ecclesiastical. 

It  may  further  be  obse'rved,  in  support  of  the  same  doctrine, 
that  some  of  the  most  common  appellations,  whereby  the  bi- 
shop was  first  distinguished,  bear  evident  traces  of  this  origin. 
He  was  not  only  called  ^poira^,  but  arpoe^^a?,  president,  chairman  ; 
and  by  periphrasis  the  presbyters  were  called  «<  bk  m  ^idlspa  S-pova, 
they  who  possessed  the  second  seat  or  throne,  as  the  bishop  was 
■xp6>ro«.x6i^fio<i,  he  who  possessed  the  first.  Thus  he  was  in  the 
presbytery,  as  the  speaker  in  the  house  of  commons,  who  is  not 
of  a  superiour  order  to  the  other  members  of  the  house,  but  is 
a.  commoner  among  commoners,  and  is  only,  in  consequence  ot 
that  station,  accounted  the  first  among  those  of  his  own  rank. 
The  same  thing  might  be  illustrated  by  the  prolocutor  of  either 
house  of  convocation  in  England,  or  the  moderator  of  an  eccle- 
siastical judicatory  in  Scotland.  Now  as  the  president  is,  as 
it  were,  the  mouth  of  the  council,  by  which  they  deliver  their 
judgment,  and  by  which  theyaddress  themselves  to  others,  it  is 
natural  to  suppose,  that  through  the  same  channel,  to  wit,  their 


88  LECTURES  ON 

president,  they  should  be  addressed  by  others.  A  letter  there- 
fore to  the  congregation  might  very  naturally  be  directed  to 
him  who  possessed  the  first  place,  and  presided  among  them. 

But  it  may  be  said,  Is  not  this  at  most  but  a  plausible  conjec- 
ture, and  not  a  proof  ?  1  acknowledge,  indeed,  that  the  poirxt 
does  not  admit  so  positive  a  proof  as  might  be  wished.  But  in 
a  case  of  this  kind,  the  most  plausible  conjecture,  as  it  is  all 
that  can  be  had,  v/ill  be  accounted  sufficient  by  a  reasonable 
man  for  determining  the  question.  This  solution  appears  to 
me  the  best,  because  it  puts  no  undue  stretch  upon  the  words, 
and  is  perfectly  compatible  M'^ith  that  equality  in  power  and  or- 
der, which  the  uniform  style  of  the  Acts  and  the  Epistles,  in 
the  promiscuous  application  of  the  same  appellatives,  and  in 
the  use  of  the  plural  number  on  such  occasions,  proves  to  have 
subsisted  among  the  pastors  first  settled  by  the  apostles  and 
evangelists.  This  equality  is,  in  my  opinion,  strongly  sup- 
ported. It  is  only  the  solution  now  given  of  the  difficulty, 
arising  from  the  noted  passage  in  the  Apocalypse,  that  I  ad- 
mit to  be  conjectural.  And  all  I  plead  in  its  favour  is,  that 
of  all  the  conjectures  I  have  seen  on  that  article,  it  is  the 
most  likely. 

It  was  doubtless  the  distinction  of  one  pastor  in  every 
church,  marked  by  this  apostle,  chough  not  made  by  any  who 
had  written  before  him,  which  has  led  TertuUian,  whose  pub- 
lications first  appeared  but  about  a  century  after  the  apostles, 
to  consider  him  as  the  institutor  of  episcopacy.  These  are 
his  words,  (lib.  iv.  adv.  Marcionem)  "•'  Ordo  tamen  episcopo- 
"  rum  ad  originem  recensus,  in  Joannem  stabit  auctorem  :'* 
which  Bingham  (Christian  Antiquities,  b.  ii.  chap.  1,  sect.  3,) 
translates  thus: — •' I'he  order  of  bishops,  when  it  is  traced 
*'  up  to  its  original,  will  be  found  to  have  Saint  John  for  one 
*'  of  its  authors."  A  palpable  misinterpretation  of  our  anti- 
quary. TertuUian  says  expressly,  "  Our  inquiries  into  the 
*'  origin  of  the  episcopal  order  terminate  in  John  the  author." 
Had  that  father  said,  "  Mundus  ad  originem  recensus,  in 
*'  Deum  stabit  creatorem  ;"  would  Bingham  have  rendered  it, 
*'  The  world,  when  it  is  traced  up  to  its  original,  will  be  found 
"  to  have  God  for  one  of  its  creators  ?"  I  cannot  allow  myself 
to  think  it.  Yet  the  interpolation  in  rendering  creatorem  one 
of  its  creators,  is  not  more  flagrant,  than  in  rendering  auctcrem 
one  of  its  authors.  By  this  version  he  avoids  showing  what  is 
extremely  plain  from  the  words,  that  TertuUian  did  not  think 
there  was  any  subordination  in  the  pastors  of  the  churches 
instituted  by  the  other  apostles.  Else  how  should  he  refer  us 
to  John,  of  whom,  though  an  eminent  propagator  of  the  faith, 
we  have  not  such  particular  accounts  as  of  some  of  his  col- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  89 

leagues  ?  If  he  had  discovered  any  traces  of  such  a  disparity 
in  the  settling  of  the  churches,  recorded  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  or  mentioned  in  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  it  is  impossi- 
ble he  should  have  referred  us  solely  to  John,  of  whom  we 
have  so  little  information,  as  the  author.  But  this  opinion  he 
has  evidently  founded  on  the  Apocalypse,  a  book  mentioned 
by  him  in  the  same  sentence.  Now  if  he  thought  that  that 
apostle  gave  a  model  to  the  churches  escablished  by  him,  which 
the  other  apostles  had  not  given  to  theirs,  (though  in  after- 
times  it  came  to  be  universally  adopted)  we  must  conclude,  at 
least,  that  he  did  not  consider  any  particular  external  form  as 
essential  to  the  christian  church,  but  as  a  thing  entirely  discre- 
tionary in  the  several  founders.  And  that  this  was  his  opinion, 
appears  at  least  probable  from  this,  that  he  had  mentioned 
John's  paternal  care  of  certain  churches  in  the  preceding  sen- 
tence, which  he  therefore  considered  as  peculiarly  his.  "  Ha- 
*'  bemus  et  Joannis  allumnas  ecclesias."  To  me,  however,  it 
is  more  likely,  that  John,  in  the  direction  of  the  epistles  to 
the  seven  churches,  availed  himself  of  a  distinction,  which  had 
subsisted  from  the  beginning,  but  as  it  implied  no  difference 
in  order  and  power,  was  too  inconsiderable  to  be  noticed  in 
the  history.  This  I  think  at  least  more  credible,  than  that 
either  the  church  was  new  modelled  by  this  apostle,  or  that 
the  different  apostles  adopted  different  plans. 

In  my  next  lecture,  I  shall  make  a  few  more  observations 
on  the  constitution  of  the  apostolick  church,  and  on  the  nature 
and  character  of  episcopacy,  which  obtained  in  the  second  and 
third  centuries  ;  and  shall,  in  that  and  some  subsequent  dis- 
courses, proceed  in  tracing  the  progress  of  the  hierarchy  from 
the  latent  and  inconsiderable  seeds  or  principles  whence  it 
sprang^  to  the  amazing  height  at  which  it  at  length  arrived. 


M 


96  LECTURES  ON 


LECTURE  VI. 


J.  HE  purpose  of  this  lecture  is  to  make  a  few  more  obser- 
vaiions  on  the  constitution  of  the  apostolick.  church,  and  on 
the  nature  of  the  episcopacy  which  obtained  in  the  second 
^nd  ihird  centuries. 

When  the  gospel  was  preached  by  the  apostles  throughout 
the  different  cities  and  countries  into  which  they  travelled, 
wherever  they  made  as  many  converts  as  would  be  sufficient 
to  form  a  congregation,  they  caused  them  to  unite  together  for 
this  purpose  ;  and  with  the  first  convenient  opportunity,  set- 
tled (as  Clemens  Romanus  expresses  it)  bishops  and  deacons 
among  them,  for  instructing  them  more  fully,  both  publickl;^ 
and  privately,  for  guiding  them  by  their  counsel  in  every 
doubtful  or  difficult  exigence,  and  for  conducting  more  regu- 
larly in  their  assemblies  the  publick  worship  and  ordinances. 
When  the  disciples  in  any  place  were  not  numerous  enough 
to  form  a  congregation  by  themselves,  they  united  them  to  that 
which  was  nearest.  To  the  congregation  they  gave  the  name 
^xx^^Tjincc.  which  is  commonly  rendered  church. 

The  deacons,  who  seem  at  first  to  have  been  chosen  merely 
in  consequence  of  a  particular  exigence,  as  we  learn  from 
Acts  vi.  1,  &c.  to  wit,  for  the  inspection  of  the  poor,  and  the 
distribution  of  the  charitable  collections,  were  admitted  very 
early,  probably  in  the  time  of  the  apostles,  to  an  inferiour 
part  in  the  sacred  ministry,  such  as  attending  the  pastors  in 
the  discharge  of  the  religious  offices,  and  acting  under  their 
direction.  The  deaconship  served  in  fact  as  a  noviciate  to  the 
ministry. 

The  bishops  or  pi"esbyters  (for  these  terms,  as  we  have  seen, 
were  then  used  synonymously)  appear  to  have  been  all-per- 
fectiy  co-ordinate  in  ministerial  powers.  That  a  certain  pri- 
oritv  or  presidentship,  for  order's  sake,  and  in  deference  either 
to  seniority,  or  to  distinc;uishable  talents,  was  allowed  to  one 
of  their  number,  is  probable  for  the  reasons  assigned  in  my 
last  discourse.  That  the  p-istors  were  from  the  beginning 
vested  with  a  superintendency  over  the  congregation  purely. 


ECCLESrASTICAL  HISTORY.  91 

in  what  concerned  spiritual  matters,  cannot  be  questioned. 
Some  of  the  titles  that  are  given  them  in  scripture,  liya/itevoi, 
Trpeis-xfievet,  guides,  governours,  undoubtedly  imply  thus  n  U(  h, 
as  JO  also  che  terms  in  which  the  duty  of  the  people  to  their 
pastors  is  recommended;  vu^ea-de  vveuHs,  obey,  submit,  which 
manifestly  require  a  respectful  observance  on  their  part.  For 
this  reason  1  imagine^  that  the  generality  of  those  modern 
sects,  which  have  adopted  the  congregational,  or  independent 
plan,  as  it  is  called,  have  gone  to  an  extreme,  though  not  the 
most  common  extreme,  in  bringing  the  pastoral  authority  too 
low. 

It  is  however  certain,  that  when  authority  of  any  kind  is 
unattended  with  what  are  commonly  called  coercive  measures, 
or  the  power  of  the  sword,  and  unsupported  by  temporal 
splendour,  or  worldly  sanctions,  it  is  impossible  to  preserve  it 
otherwise  amongst  an  enlightened  people,  than  by  purity  of 
character  in  those  vested  with  it,  and  by  diligence  in  the  dis- 
charge of  the  duties  of  their  station.  In  such  cases,  this  is  the 
only  foundation  on  which  the  respect,  obedience,  and  submis- 
sion of  others  can  be  raised.  It  was  therefore  a  pertinent 
advice  that  Paul  gave  to  Timothy,  however  oddly  it  mav  ap- 
pear at  first : — "  Let  no  man  despise  thee."  For  we  may 
justly  say,  that  in  ninety-nine  cases  out  of  a  hundred,  if  a 
pastor  is  despised,  he  has  himself  to  blame.  All  however 
that  I  purpose,  by  quoting  the  aforesaid  titles  and  commands, 
is  to  show,  that  in  what  related  to  the  peculiar  duties  of  their 
office,  a  reverential  attention  was  acknowledged  to  be  due  tb 
them,  as  the  guides  and  guardians  of  the  flock. 

There  were  some  things,  however,  which,  from  the  begin- 
ning, were  conducted  in  common  by  the  pastors,  the  deacons, 
and  the  whole  congregation.  This  appears  particularly  and 
most  properly  to  have  been  the  case  in  all  matters  of  scandal 
and  offence.  In  regard  to  these,  it  is  the  community,  that,  in 
strictness  of  speech,  is  offended.  The  very  word  scandal  or 
stumbling-block  implies  this.  It  is  the  community,  therefore, 
that  ought  to  be  satisfied.  It  is  to  them  our  Lord  appears 
(Matth.  xviii.  15,  &c.)  to  have  committed  the  charge  of  ad- 
monishing delinquents,  and  even  of  excommunicating  obsti- 
nate offenders.  But  1  shall  have  occasion  to  examine  the  import 
of  that  passage  in  the  gospel  afterwards.  Only  it  may  be 
further  observed,  in  confirmation  of  what  has  been  now  ad- 
vanced, that  the  earliest  practice  of  the  church  was  conforma- 
ble to  the  interpretation  now  given.  Clement,  in  the  epistle 
above  quoted,  (chap,  liv.)  calls  church  censures  ra,  ^pee-lxa-ovfum, 
ozs-o  TH  vXnB-evg,  the  things  commanded  by  the  multitude,  that 
is,  the  congregation. 


9>^,  LECTURES  ON 

-  vi^nother  point,  in  which  they  had  doubtless  all  a  share,  w^s 
the  election  of  their  pastors  and  deacons.  That  the  deacons 
were  at  first  chosen  t>y  the  people,  is  manifest  from  the  acf 
count  we  have  of  their  institution  above  referred  to.  Yet  this 
point,  however  clear  in  its  origin,  seems  very  clearly  to  have 
undergone  a  change.  In  regard  to  the  choice  of  pastors,  the 
matter  is  not  so  plain.  Some  expressions  in  ancient  authors 
seern  to  favour  the  opinion,  that  these  also  were  constituted 
in  consequence  of  the  election  of  the  people.  Other  expres- 
sions favour  more  the  notion,  that  the  choice  was  in  the  presby- 
tery, who  pi-oposed  the  candidate  they  had  elected  to  the 
people  ;  and  that  the  people  had  the  power  of  rejecting,  with- 
out assigning  a  reason,  when  they  did  not  approve  the  choice. 
It  is  not  improbable,  that  different  methods,  in  this  respect, 
obtained  in  different  congregations.  From  scripture  we  have 
not  sufficient  ground  for  concluding  positively  on  either  side. 
Clement,  in  the  forecited  epistle,  seems  to  favour  the  second 
opinion.  -  The  passage  I  allude  to  is  in  chap,  xliv,  where, 
speaking  of  the  pastors,  he  uses  this  expression  :  "  Those  who 
"  were  constituted  by  the  apostles,  and  afterwards  by  other 
"  eminent  men,  with  the  consent  of  the  whole  congregation."— 

It  is  not  to  be  imagined,  that  among  people  so  artless,  and  at 
the  same  time  so  charitable,  as  we  have  reason  to  think  the 
first  christian  societies  actually  were,  the  bounding  lines  of  the 
powers  and  privileges  of  the  different  orders  would  be  accu- 
rately chalked  out.  It  is  more  than  probable,  that  the  people, 
in  a  perfect  reliance  on  the  knowledge,  zeal,  and  experience  o£ 
their  pastors,  would  desire,  before  every  thing,  to  know  whom 
they,  who  were  the  fittest  judges,  and  had  the  same  object  in, 
view,  would  think  proper  to  recommend ;  and  that,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  pastors,  having  nothing  so  much  at  heart  as  the 
edification  of  the  people,  would  account  their  disapprobation 
of  a  candidate  a  sufficient  reason  for  making  another  choice. 
It  is  indeed  certain,  as  appears  by  the  epistles  of  Cyprian, 
which  were  written  about  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  that 
for  the  three  first  ages  of  the  church,  though  most  matters 
came  at  last  to  be  previously  discussed  in  the  presbytery, 
where  some  judgment  was  formed  concerning  them,  no  final 
resolution  was  taken  in  any  affair  of  moment,  without  commu- 
nicating it  to  the  people,  and  obtaining  their  approbation.  I 
signified  before,  that  the  presbytery,  of  which  there  is  frequent 
mention  in  the  ancient  fathers,  consisted  not  only  of  the  pres- 
byters, with  their  president,  to  whom  the  name  bishop,  at  first 
common  to  them  all,  came  soon  to  be  appropriated,  but  also  of 
the  deacons. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  93 

It  has,  in  modern  times,  been  made  a  question,  whether  the 
presbyters,  even  exclusive  of  their  president,  could  all  come 
under  one  denomination  ;  or  whether  some  of  them  were  pro- 
perly pastors  and  teachers,  and  others  only  assistants  in  mat- 
ters of  government  and  discipline.  Some  keen  advocates  for 
presbytery,  as  the  word  is  now  understood,  on  the  model  of 
John  Calvin,  have  imagined  they  discovered  this  distinction  in 
these  words  of  Paul  to  Timothy,  (1  Tim.  v.  17,) — ''Let  the 
''  elders  that  rule  well  be  counted  worthy  of  double  honour ; 
*'  especially  they  who  labour  in  the  word  and  doctrine." 
Here,  say  they,  is  a  two  fold  partition  of  the  officers  comprised 
under  the  same  name,  into  those  who  rule,  and  those  who 
labour  in  the  word  and  doctrine,  that  is,  into  ruling  eiders  and 
teaching  elders.  To  this  it  is  replied,  on  the  odier  side,  that 
the  especially  is  not  intended  to  indicate  a  different  oiiice,  but 
to  distinguish  from  others  those  who  assiduously  apply  them- 
selves to  the  most  important  as  well  as  the  most  difficult  part  of 
their  office,  publick  teaching ;  that  the  distinction  intended  is 
therefore  not  official  but  personal ;  that  it  does  not  relate  to  a 
difference  in  the  powers  conferred,  but  solely  to  a  difference  in 
their  application.  It  is  not  to  the  persons  who  have  the  charge, 
but  to  those  who  labour  in  it,  o<  xow<«vTf5.  And  to  this  ex- 
position, as  far  the  more  natural,  I  entirely  agree.  What  was 
affirmed  before,  in  relation  to  the  coincidence  of  the  office  of 
bishop  and  presbyter,  from  the  uniform  and  promiscuous  ap- 
plication of  the  same  names  and  titles,  may  doubtless  be  urged, 
in  the  present  case,  with  siill  greater  strength.  The  distinc- 
tion is  too  considerable  between  a  pastor  and  a  lay  eider,  as  it 
is  called,  to  be  invariably  confounded  under  one  common  name. 
When  the  character  of  such  as  are  proper  for  the  office  of 
elder  is  pointed  out  by  Paul  to  Timothy  *,  apt  to  teach,  or  fit 
for  teaching,  S'i^»yS}ix,(^,  is  mentioned  as  an  essential  quality  ; 
and  though  the  words  be  different  in  the  charge  to  I'itus  f , 
the  same  thing  is  implied,  »W  hvct]®^ »  xai  TrxpccKoiXBiv  £v  rt,  h^d^KctXta, 
rt)  if/iutvairii  xeit  t«5  eivriXs'ye)iTai;  eP^.ey^stVi  that  he  may  be  able,  by  sound 
doctrine,  both  to  exhort  and  to  convince  the  gainsayers.  This 
is  spoken  indiscriminately  of  all  who  were  proper  to  be  nomi- 
nated bishops  or  elders,  which  we  cannot  suppose  would  have 
been  done,  if  part  of  them  were  to  have  no  concern  in  teach- 
ing. We  find  no  such  quality  among  those  mentioned  as  ne- 
cessary in  deacons.  And  a  dubious,  not  to  say  a  forced, 
exposition  of  a  single  passage  of  scripture,  is  rather  too  small 
a  circumstance,  whereon  to  found  a  distinction  of  so  great 
consequence.     If,  therefore,  it  were   only  from  this  passage, 

*  1  Tim.  iii.  2.  f  Tit,  i.  9. 


94  LECTURES  ON 

that  an  argument  could  be  brought  for  the  admission  of  those 
denominated  laymen  to  a  share  in  the  management  of  church 
aflfairs,  I,  for  my  part,  should  most  readily  acknowledge,  that 
our  warrant  for  the  practice  would  be  extremely  questionable. 
But  I  shall  have  occasion  to  consider  this  afterwards. 

In  the  second  century  it  is  very  plain,  that  a  settled  dis- 
tinction, in  several  respects,  obtained  between  the  bishop  and 
his  colleagues  in  the  presbytery,  for  as  yet  they  may  still  be 
called  colleagues.  Many  titles,  which  had  before  been  com- 
mon to  them  all,  came  at  length  to  be  appropriated  to  him 
who  v/as  considered  as  their  head,  such  as  s'STta-Mzr^;  iya^ 
/K.Fy(^)  TT^oerai,  TirparoKct^eof)®-',  zrpoirccfiiv^,  -zs-oiiAOivy  and  SOme  Others. 
Though  names  are  but  sounds,  those  who  are  conversant  in  the 
history  of  mankind  will  readily  alloAv,  that  they  have  greater  in- 
fluence on  the  opinions  of  the  generality  of  men,  than  most 
people  are  aware  of.  Besides,  it  is  of  the  nature  of  power, 
unless  guarded  by  a  watchful  jealousy,  (rarely  to  be  found  in 
unexperienced  and  undesigning  people)  to  accumulate  and 
gather  strength.  Distinguish  one  at  first  but  by  a  small  de- 
gree of  superiority,  and  the  distinction  you  have  made  will 
very  soon,  and  as  it  were  naturally,  carry  other  distinctions 
along  with  it.  There  is  something  here  that  resem- 
bles gravitation  in  material  things.  As  the  quantity  of  mat- 
ter increases,  its  attractive  force  increases,  and  it  more  easily 
draws  other  matter  to  itself. 

Some  have  represented  it  as  an  insuperable  objection  to 
the  presbyterian  h3'pothesis,  concerning  the  rise  of  episcopal 
superiority,  that  it  seems  to  imply  so  great  ambition  in  one 
part,  and  so  great  supineness  (not  to  give  it  a  worse  name) 
in  the  rest  of  the  primitive  pastors,  ordained  by  the  apostles, 
and  by  the  apostolick  men  that  came  after  them,  as  is  perfect-^ 
ly  incredible  ;  this  they  seem  to  think  a  demonstration  a  pri' 
ori^  that  the  thing  is  impossible.  Let  it  be  observed,  that  I 
have  all  along  admitted  an  original  distinction,  which,  though 
very  different  from  that  which  in  process  of  time  obtained, 
served  for  a  foundation  to  the  edifice.  And  so  far  am  I 
from  thinking  that  the  ambition,  or  the  vices,  of  the  first  minis- 
ters gave  rise  to  their  authority,  that  I  am  certain,  that  this  ef- 
fect is  much  more  justly  ascribed  to  their  virtues.  An  aspi- 
ring disposition  rouses  jealousy — jealousy  puts  people  on  their 
guard.  There  needs  no  more  to  check  ambition,  whilst  it  re- 
mains unarmed  with  either  wealth  or  power.  But  there  is 
nothing  which  men  are  not  ready  to  yield  to  distinguished 
merit,  especially  when  matters  are  in  that  state  wherein  every 
kind  of  pre-eminence,  instead  of  procuring  wealth  and  secular 
advantages,    exposes  but  to  greater  danger,    and  to  greater 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  95 

suflferihg.  Even  the  small  distinction  of  being  accounted  the 
first  in  the  society,  and,  as  it  were,  the  senior  brother  among 
the  pastors,  would  be  a  strong  incitement  to  a  faithful  and  zea- 
lous minister  to  distinguish  himself,  by  being  the  first  also  in 
every  difficulty,  and  in  every  danger.  This  would  beget  in  the 
people  a  more  implicit  deference  to  his  judgment,  and  respect 
to  his  person.  A  deference  at  first  merely  paid  to  virtue, 
comes  at  last,  through  the  gradual  operation  ot  habit,  to  be 
considered  as  due  to  office.  What  was  gratuitously  conferred 
on  the  meritorious  predecessor,  is  claimed  by  the  undeserving 
successour  as  a  right.  And  the  very  principles  of  our  nature 
tend  to  favour  the  claim.  But  when  ease  and  affluence  succeed 
to  danger  and  distress,  then  indeed  ambition  on  the  one  side, 
and  dependance  on  the  other,  will  be  able  to  secure  what  virtue 
alone  could  earn.  Such  is  the  ordinary  progression  of  human 
things.  Similar  to  this,  if  traced  backwards,  will  be  found 
the  origin  of  almost  all  the  governments  that  are  not  founded 
in  conquest. 

It  were  easy,  on  the  same  ground,  with  those  objectors,  to 
evince  a  priori^  (if  a  specious  declamation  on  a  sort  of  general 
principles,  which  pay  no  regard  to  fact  and  testimony,  could 
evince)  that  monarchy,  or  the  dominion  of  one  man  over  innu- 
merable multitudes  of  men,  who,  taken  severally,  may  be  his 
equals,  both  in  understanding,  and  in  bodily  strength,  is,  in  the 
nature  of  things,  impossible «  But  how  do  all  such  futile  rea- 
sonings vanish,  like  shadows,  before  the  torch  of  history. 
This  I  observe  only  by  the  way,  not  that  I  think  the  steps  so 
difficult  to  imagine  by  which  this  ecclesiastick  power  has  first 
arisen.  For  example,  from  making  their  president  a  man  of 
great  consequence  among  them,  the  transition  is  easy  to  their 
making  his  concurrence  in  all  measures  a  conditio  sine  qua  non  ; 
that  is  to  say,  their  considering  every  thing  as  invalid  that  is 
done  against  his  judgment.  It  is  but  one  step  further,  and 
every  thing  becomes  valid  which  bears  the  stan:ip  of  his  au- 
thority. Now  if,  in  this  manner,  the  president  had  been 
raised  in  the  churches  of  some  principal  cities,  these  would 
soon  become  a  standard  to  the  rest.  And  to  their  first  rising 
in  such  cities  to  this  pre-eminence,  analogy  to  the  civil  govern- 
ment (as  appears  both  from  the  testimony  of  antiquity,  and 
from  the  reason  of  the  thing)  did  not  a  little  contribuie.  In 
this  judgment  we  can  plead  the  concurrence  of  some  of  our 
keenest  antagonists.  '*•  Civitatum  Ronvanorum,"  says  Dod- 
well,  "  Grse'  arumque  disciplinam  in  civitatem  ecclesiastica 
*'  etiam  administratione  observatam  constat  e  TertulUani  ali- 
*'  quantisper  coaevo  Origine.  Sic  enim  ille  illas  invicem  cou- 
"  tendit,  ut  partes  partibus   etiam  responderent."     Thus  he 


96  LECTURES  ON 

who  presided  was  considered  as  corresponding  in  ecclesiasticJc 
matters  to  their  prefect,  proconsul,  or  chief  magistrate,  by 
whatever  title  he  was  distinguished,  the  presbytery  to  their 
senate  or  council,  and  the  congregation  to  the  comitia  or  con- 
vention of  the  people.  I  make  no  doubt,  as  Jerom  plausibly 
supposes,  that  the  acquiescence  of  the  people  would  be  given 
the  more  readily,  from  the  consideration  of  the  expediency  of 
such  an  arrangement  for  preserving  union.  When  one  and  the 
same  congregation  was  under  the  direction  of  a  plurality  of 
pastors  entirely  equal,  unless  there  were  an  umpire,  to  whose 
decision  they  were  all  considered  as  under  an  obligation  to 
submit,  there  might  be  some  danger  of  a  rupture,  in  case  their 
sentiments  should  jar.  But  we  shall  see  in  the  sequel,  (what 
is  fully  as  unaccountable)  that  from  causes  perfectly  similar,  to 
wit,  an  allowed  presidentship  in  synods  and  councils  to  the 
bishops  of  the  capitals  of  provinces,  kingdoms,  regions,  and 
of  the  empire  itself ;  and  from  the  gradual  appropriation  of 
titles,  formerly  common,  arose  insensibly  the  real  presidency 
of  metropolitical,  patriarchal,  and  even  papal  power. 

The  first  ecclesiastical  author  who  mentions  bishop,  pres- 
byter, and  deacon,  as  three  distinct  orders  of  church  officers, 
is  Ignatius,  bishop  of  Antioch,  who  is  supposed  to  have  writ- 
ten about  the  sixteenth  year  of  the  second  century,  and  by 
some  even  sooner.  Indeed,  several  of  the  epistles  ascribed  to 
him  are  now  acknowledged,  by  criticks  of  all  denominations^ 
to  be  spurious,  and  some  of  the  rest  are  admitted,  even  by  his 
ablest  advocates,  to  be  interpolated  ;  insomuch,  that  it  would 
not  be  easy  to  say  how  we  could  with  safety  found  a  decision 
on  an  author,  with  whose  works  transcribers,  in  the  judgment 
of  both  sides,  have  made  so  free.  What  makes  his  testimony 
the  more  to  be  suspected  is,  first,  because  the  fore-mentioned 
distinction  is  so  frequently  and  officiously  obtruded  on  the  rea- 
der, sometimes  not  in  the  most  modest  and  becoming  terms, 
as  was  the  manner  of  the  apostles,  when  speaking  of  their  own 
authority;  and  obedience  is  enjoined  to  the  bishop  and  pres- 
byters, even  where  the  injunction  cannot  be  deemed  either  na- 
tural or  pertinent,  as  in  his  epistle  to  Polycarp,  who  was  him- 
self a  bishop  :  secondly,  because  the  names  bishop  and  presby- 
ter are  never  used  by  him  for  expressing  the  same  office,  as 
they  had  been  uniformly  used  by  all  who  had  preceded  him, 
and  were  occasionally  used  by  most  of  the  ecclesiastick  writers 
of  that  century;  thirdly  and  principally,  because  Polycarp,  a 
contemporary  and  surviver  of  Ignatius,  in  a  letter  to  the  Phi- 
iippians,  quoted  in  a  former  discourse,  pointing  out  the  du- 
ties of  all  ranks,  pastors,  and  people,  makes  mention  of  only 
two  orders  of  ministers,  to  wit,  presbyters  and  deacons,  in  the 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  9f 

same  manner  as  Luke,  and  Paul,  and  Clement,  had  done  be» 
fore  him  ;  nay,  and  recommends  to  the  people  submission  to 
them,  and  only  to  them  in  terms,  which  I  u  ust  say  were  nei- 
ther proper,  nor  even  decent,  if  these  very  ministers  had 
a  superiour  in  the  church,  to  whom  they  themselves,  as  well 
as  the  people,  were  subject.  To  me  the  difference  between 
these  two  writers  appears  by  no  means  as  a  diversity  in  style, 
43ut  as  a  repugnancy  in  sentiment.  They  cannot  be  both  made 
applicable  to  the  same  state  of  the  church.  So  that  we  are 
forced  to  conclude,  that  in  the  writings  of  one,  or  the  other, 
there  must  have  been  something  spurious  or  interpolated. 
Now  I  have  heard  no  argument  urged  against  the  authenticity 
of  Polycarp's  letter,  equally  cogent  as  some  of  the  arguments 
employed  against  the  authenticity  of  the  epistles  of  Ignatius. 
And  indeed  the  state  of  the  church,  in  no  subsequent  period, 
can  well  account  for  such  a  forgery,  as  the  epistle  of  the  for- 
mer to  the  Philippians  ;  whereas,  the  ambition  of  the  ecclesias- 
ticks,  for  which  some  of  the  following  centuries  were  remark- 
able, renders  it  extremely  easy  to  account  for  the  nauseous  re- 
petition of  obedience  and  subjection  to  the  bishop,  presbyters, 
and  deacons,  to  be  found  in  the  letters  of  Ignatius. 

The  way  in  which  Dodwell  accounts  for  it,  (though  in  itself 
not  implausible)  is  very  singular,  aa  his  sentimtats  are  on  many 
subjects.  He  says,  that  it  was  because  the  bishop's  authority 
was  at  that  time  a  perfect  novelty,  totally  unknown  in  the 
church,  that  Ignatius  found  it  necessary  to  exert  himself  to  the 
utmost,  to  recommend  and  establish  it.  According  to  this 
modern,  the  power  and  all  the  prerogatives  of  bishops  were  a 
mere  upstart  of  the  second  century,  after  the  death  of  all  the 
apostles,  and  after  the  compilement  of  the  canonical  scrip- 
tures. It  is  in  vain,  therefore,  he  acknowledges,  to  look  for 
any  trace  of  episcopal  authority  in  the  New  Testament.  In  the 
days  of  the  apostles,  it  was  not  bj-  prelacy  that  the  church  was 
governed,  but  by  a  species  of  popery,  with  which,  if  I  mistake 
not,  Mr.  Dodwell  was  the  first  v,  ho  brought  the  world  acquaint- 
ed. The  pope  was  not  the  apostle  Peter,  but  the  apostle 
James  :  the  papal  throne  was  erected  not  at  Rome,  but  at  Jeru- 
salem; and  after  the  destruction  of  this  city  by  the  Romans,  trans- 
ferred to  Ephesus  ;  and  when  finally  suppressed,  the  episcopa- 
cy was  reared  upon  its  ruins.  Yet  of  this  episcopacy,  though 
neither  coeval  with  the  christian  religion,  nor  of  apostolical 
institution,  for  it  did  not  obtain  till  after  the  death  of  John,  the 
last  of  the  apostles,  and  of  which  we  cannot  have  scriptural 
evidence,  as  it  did  not  exist  till  several  years  after  the  finishing 
of  the  canon,  the  absolute  necessity  since  the  sixth  year  of  the 
second  century,  and  no  sooner,  is  such,  that  without  it  there  is 

N 


98  LECTURES  ON 

no  church  of  Christ,  no  salvation  of  men.  Damnation  or  an- 
nihilation is  all  the  prospect  that  remains  even  for  those  who 
believe  and  obey  the  gospel.  For  the  rejection  of  an  innova- 
tion which  has  no  place  there,  and  of  which  all  the  sacred  wri- 
ters were  ignorant,  can  never  imply  either  disbelief  or  disobe- 
dience of  ihe  gospel.  But  why,  it  mav  be  said,  detail  extrava- 
gancies, more  like  the  ravings  of  a  disordered  brain,  than  the 
sober  deductions  of  a  mind  capable  of  reflection?  1  should 
indeed  have  thought  the  task  unnecessary,  if  experience  had 
not  proved,  that  even  such  extravagancies  have  sometimes 
been  productive  of  infinite  mischief.  If  Dodwell,  with  all  his 
learning,  had  not  been  a  perfect  idolater  of  his  own  eccentrick 
imagination,  he  could  not  have  acquiesced  in  a  system  so  chi- 
merical, so  ill-compacted,  so  destitute  of  every  kind  of  proof, 
external  or  internal,  and  to  which  all  the  sources  of  evidence, 
hitherto  known  in  theological  controversy,  reason,  scripture, 
and  tradition,  are  equally  repugnant.  If  it  had  been  his  ex- 
press object  to  produce  a  scheme  which  might  outdo  even  the 
Romish,  not  only  in  absurdity  but  in  malignity,  he  could  not 
have  succeeded  better.  His  unceasing  cry  was  schism ;  yet 
in  the  scriptural  sense  a  greater  schismatick  than  himself  the 
age  did  not  produce.  Whose  doctrine  was  ever  found  more 
hostile  to  that  fundamental  principle,  declared  by  our  Lord  to 
be  the  criterion  of  our  Christianity,  mutual  love  ?  Whose  doc- 
trine ever  was  more  successful  in  planting,  by  means  of  uncha- 
ritable and  self-opinioned  judgments,  the  principle  of  hatred  in 
its  stead  ?  1  he  test  to  which  Scripture  points  is.  Does  the 
teaching  in  question  alienate  the  hearts  of  christians,  or  unite 
them?  Does  it  conciliate  the  affections  where  differences  have  un- 
happily arisen?  ordoesitwiden  thebreach?  Iftheformer,thespirit 
is  christian ;  if  the  latter,  schismatical.  The  former  is  not  more 
productive  of  charity^  the  end  of  the  commandment,  or  gospel- 
covenant,  and  the  bond  of  perfectness,  than  the  latter  is  of  its 
opposite,  malignity,  the  source  of  discord,  the  parent  of  into- 
lerance and  persecution.  It  would  be  unjust  not  to  add,  in  ex- 
tenuation of  the  guilt  of  those  who  mistake  bigotry  for  zeal, 
what  our  Lord  pleaded  in  behalf  of  his  murderers.  They  hioTV 
not  what  they  do.  This  charity,  where  there  appears  the  smal- 
lest scope  for  it,  is  due  even  to  the  uncharitable.  In  regard  to 
vital  religion,  it  is  to  be  regretted,  that  men,  even  of  talents 
and  science,  often  show  little  penetration,  rarely  going  deeper 
than  the  surface.  Thenatiirnl  w*?;?,  (saith  Paul,  1  Cor.  ii,  14, 
more  properlv  the  animal  man^  •^uyjy.(^,  not  (pvariy.'^  uvB-pwx-®^) 
receiveth  not  the  things  of  the  spirit  of  God ;  for  they  are  foolish- 
ness to  him^  neither  can  he  know  them^  because  they  are  spiritual- 
ly discerned.     Their  acquaintance  is  merely  with  the  outside  : 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  99 

they  break  their  teeth  upon  the   shell,  without  reaching  the 
kernel. 

But  to  return  to  Ignatius,  I  say  not  that  the  epistles  in  ques- 
tion ought  to  be  rejected  in  the  lump,  but  that  undue  freedoms 
have  been  used  even  with  the  purest  of  them,  by  some  over 
zealous  partisans  of  the  priesthood.  They  have,  in  many 
things,  a  remarkable  coincidence  with  the  sentiments  repeat- 
edly inculcated  in  the  apostolick  constitutions,  a  compilation 
probably  begun  in  the  third  century,  and  ended  in  the  fourth 
or  fifth.  Among  the  writers  of  the  second  age,  I  shall  men- 
tion also  Ireneus,  who  is  supposed  to  have  written  about  the 
middle  of  the  second  century,  and  in  whose  writi-.igs  the 
names,  bishop  and  presbyter,  and  others  of  the  like  import,  are 
sometimes  used  indiscriminately.  I  acknowledge,  hov/ever, 
that  the  distinction  of  these,  as  of  different  orders,  began 
about  this  time  generally  to  prevail :  the  difference  was  not 
indeed  near  so  considerable  as  it  became  afterwards.  Accord- 
ingly, Ireneus  talks  in  much  the  same  style  of  both.  What  at 
one  time  he  ascribes  to  bishops,  at  another  he  ascribes  to  pres- 
byters :  he  speaks  of  each  in  the  same  terms,  as  entided  to  obe- 
dience from  the  people,  as  succeeding  the  aposdes  in  the  mini- 
stry of  the  word,  as  those  by  whom  the  apostolick  doctrine  and 
traditions  had  been  handed  down.  Thus  (lib.  iii,  chap.  2,)  he 
says,  concerning  the  hereticks  of  his  time,  "  Cum  autem  ad 
**  earn  iterum  traditionem-  quae  est  ab  apostoiis,  quae  per  succes- 
*' siones  presbyterorum  in  ecclesiis  custoditur,  provocamus 
*'  eos,  qui  adversantur  traditioni,  dicent  se  non  solum  prt-shy- 
*'  teris,  sed  etiam  apostoiis  existentes  sapientiores,  synceraui 
*'  invenisse  veritatem."  Here  not  only  are  the  presbyters  men- 
tioned as  the  successours  of  the  apostles,  but  in  ranging  the 
ministries,  no  notice  is  taken  of  any  intervening  order  such  as 
that  of  the  bishops.  It  is  not  always  easy  to  say,  whether  by 
the  two  appellations,  bishop  and  presbyter,  Ireneus  means  the 
same  order,  or  different  orders.  In  the  former  case  he  would 
appear  to  make  no  distinction,  and  in  the  latter  very  little  be- 
tween them.  Dr.  Pearson  admits,  (which  by  the  way  is  con- 
tradicted by  Dodwell)  that  the  names,  bishop  and  presliyter,  are 
often  interchanged  by  this  father,  and  others  of  his  time,  even  to 
the  end  of  the  century.  This,  however,  he  maintains,  happen- 
ed only  when  they  spoke  of  the  ministry  in  general  terms,  or 
mentioned  those  ministers  in  particular  who  had  preceded 
them  ;  affirming,  that  in  regard  to  their  own  contemporaries,, 
the  offices  of  individuals  are  never  thus  confounded*  A  man, 
who  was  in  their  time  a  bishop,  is  not  called  a  presbyter,  nor 
is  a  presbyter  called  a  bishop.  I  admit  the  truth  of  ihif;  re- 
mark, and  consider  it  as  a  very  strong  confirmatiaa  o-f  due 


100  LECTURES  ON 

doctrine  I  have  been  defending,  f'or  what  reasonable  ac-^ 
count  can  be  given  of  this  manner  ^otherwise  chargeable 
with  the  most  unpardonable  inaccuracy)  but  by  saying,  that, 
in  the  time  of  the  predecessors  of  Ireneus,  there  was  no 
distinction  worthy  of  notice  in  the  ministry  ;  whereas,  in  his 
own  time,  the  distinction  began  to  be  niarked  by  peculiar 
powers  and  prerogatives.  If  this  had  not  been  the  case,  it 
was  as  little  natural  as  excusable,  to  be  less  accurate  in  speak- 
ing of  those  that  went  before,  than  in  speaking  of  the  peo- 
ple of  his  own  ti;ne.  Was  it  ever  observed  of  writers  in 
the  fourth  and  iifth  centuries,  to  come  no  lower,  chat  they 
in  this  manner  confounded  the  different  ecclesiastical  of- 
fices of  the  third?  Is  Cyprian,  for  instance,  in  any  suc- 
ceeding age,  styled  a  presbyter  of  Carthage,  or  Rogatian  the 
bishop  ?  Are  not  their  respective  titles  as  uniformly  observed 
in  after  ages  as  in  their  own  ? 

But  to  return  to  the  epistles  of  Ignatius,  it  is  not  only  what 
we  find  singular  in  them,  for  so  early  a  period,  relating  to  the 
different  orders  of  ministers  in  the  church,  which  has  raised 
suspicions  of  their  authenticity,  or  at  least  of  their  integrity  ; 
there  are  other  causes  which  have  co-operated  in  producing 
the  same  effect ;  one  is,  the  style  in  many  places  is  not  suited 
to   the  simplicity   of  the   times  immediately  succeeding    the 
times  of  the  apostles.     It  abounds  with  inflated  epithets,  unlike 
the  humble  manner  of  the  inspired  writers  ;  and  in  this,  as  in 
other  respects,  seems  more  formed  on  that  which  became  fash- 
ionable   after  the  acquisition  of  greater   external   importance, 
which   opul'-nce   never  fails  to  bring,  and  after  the  discussion 
of  certain  theological  questions  agitated  in  the  third  and  fourth 
centuries,   to  whJch  v/e  find,   sometimes,   a  manifest  allusion. 
What  I  am  goiwg  to  observe  has  much  the  appearance  of  ana- 
chronism, vvhich  often  betrays  the  hand  of  the  interpolator. 
The  expression,  the  church  which  is  in  Syria^  occurs  twice. 
Now  nothing  can  be  more  dissimilar  to  the  dialect  which  had 
prevailed  in  the  apostolick  age,  and  which  continued  to  prevail 
in  the  second  century.     Except  when  the  church  denoted  the 
whole  christian   community,   it  meant  no  more  than  a  single 
congregation.     Of  this   I   sh  11  have   occasion  to  take   notice 
presently.     Now  there   were    many  churches  in  Syria   in  the 
days  of  Ignatius,  and  many  bishops.     Indeed  when,  through 
the  increase  of  converts,  a  bishop's  parish  came  to  contain  more 
people  than  could  be  compiehended  in  one  congregation,  the 
custom  continued,  in  contradiction  to  propriety,  of  still  calling 
his  charge  a  churchy   in  the  singular  number.     But  it  was  not 
till  after  the  distinction  made  between  the  metropolitan  and 
the  suffragans,  which   was  about  a  century  later,  that  this  use 
originated,  of  calling  all  the  churches  of  a  province  the  church 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  101 

(not  the  churches)  of  such  a  province.  To  this  they  were 
gradually  led  by  analogy.  The  metropolitan  presided  among 
the  provincial  bishops,  as  the  bishop  among  the  presbyters. 
The  application  of  the  term  was,  after  the  rise  of  patriarchal 
jurisdiction,  extended  still  further.  All  that  was  under  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  archbishop,  or  patriarch,  was  his  church. 

But  it  is  not  the  style  only  which  has  raised  suspicion,  it  is 
chiefly  the  sentiments.     "  Attend  to  the  bishop,"  says  Ignatius 
to  Polycarp,  "  that  God  may  attend  to  you.     I  pledge  my  soul 
"  for  theirs  who  are  subject  to  the  bishop,  presbyters,  and  dea- 
*'  cons.     Let  my  part  in  God  be  with   them."     Atn-iPv^ov  tym 
t£i  vmrxTo-efAsvav  ru  eTrio-Mva  k.  r.  A-  which   Cotelerius  renders 
Devovear  ego  pro  its  qui  subditi  sunt  episcopo^  &c.     Admit  that, 
from    his    adopting   the    plural   of   the   imperative  Ts-poo-exelf) 
in  the  beginning  of  the  paragraph,  he  is  to  be  considered  as  ad- 
dressing the  congregation  of  Smyrna,   and  not  the  bishop,  ta 
whom  the  letter  is  directed:  Is  there  nothing  exceptionable  in 
what  he  says  ?  Was  it  the  doctrine  of  Ignatius,  that  all  that  is 
necessary  to  salvation  in  a  christian  is  an  implicit  subjection 
to  the  bishop,  presbyters,  and  deacons?   Be  it  that  he  means 
only  in  spiritual   matters.  Is  this  the  style  of  the  apostles  to 
their  christian  brethren  ?  Was  it  thus  that  Ignatius  exhibited 
to  his  followers  the  pattern  which  had  been  given  by  that 
gTeat    apostle,    who    could    say  of   himself  and  his   fellow- 
apostles,  appealing   for   his  voucher  to  the  people's  experi- 
ence of  their  ministry.  We  preach  not  ourselves^  but  Christ  Jesus 
the  Lord^  and  ourselves  your  servants^  for  Jesus^  sake.     In  ex- 
act conformity  to  this,   Paul  expressly  disclaims  all  dominion 
over  the  faith  of  his  hearers,  who,  he  was  sensible,  were  not 
to  be  dictated  to,  but  to  be  reasoned  with,  not  to  be  command- 
ed, but  to  be  convinced.  Not  that  we  have  dominion  over  your 
faith^  but  are  helpers  of  your  joy.     And  a  little  after,  Knoiving 
the  terrours  of  the  Lord^  we  persuade  men.     It  is  no  part  of  our 
office  to  constrain,  it  is  merely  to  teach  ;   it  is  not  to  extort  an 
outward,  and  perhaps  reluctant  compliance,  but  it  is  by  the  ef- 
ficacy of  persuasion  to  subdue  the  refractory  will,   and  com- 
pletely engage  the  heart ;   for  no  obedience  in  this  cause  is 
available,  which  is  not  voluntary,  and  does  not  proceed  from 
love.     It  suits  not  even  the  apostolick  diction  to  prescribe,  to 
order,  but  to  entreat,  to  pray.     As  though  God^  says  the  apostle, 
did  beseech  you  by  us^  we  pray  you,  in  Christ's  stead.  Be  you  re- 
conciled  to  God.     The  most  authoritative  language  that  he  em- 
ploys runs  in  this  strain  ;   /  beseech  you  by  the  mercies  of  God, 
and  I  beseech  you  by  the  meekness  and  gentleness  of  Christ.     Nor 
is  this   manner  peculiarly  Paul's.     Peter,  the  prince   of  the 
apostles,  as  roraanists  style  him,  recurs  neither  to  bulls  nor  to 


102  LECTURES  ON 

rescripts,  but,  with  equal  mildness  as  his  colleague  Paul,  em- 
ploys exhortation  and  entreaty.  The  presbyters  amongst  you^ 
says  he,  /  their  felloxv-presbyter  exhort^  Feed  the  Jiock  of  God 
among  you^  taking  the  oversight  thereof  not  by  constraint^  hut 
xviUingly.  It  is  added,  neither  as  being  lords  over  God'*s  heri- 
tage^ but  being  ensamples  to  the  Jiock  ;  and,  consequently,  en- 
gaging their  imitation  by  the  attraction  of  an  amiable  example, 
and  not  enforcing  submission  by  stern  authority  and  command. 
Had  Ignatius  been  such  as  the  letters  ascribed  to  him  repre- 
sent him,  could  he  have  had  the  assurance  to  address  his  An- 
tiochians  in  the  words  of  Paul  above  quoted,  "  We  preach  not 
"  ourselves,  but  Christ  Jesus  the  Lord,  and  ourselves  vour 
*'  servants,  for  Jesus*  sake  ?"  For  is  it  not  his  predominant 
scope,  in  those  letters,  to  preach  himself  and  other  ecclesias- 
ticks,  inculcating  upon  the  people  the  most  submissive,  unli- 
mited, and  blind  obedience  to  all  of  the  clerical  order?  This 
is  an  everlasting  topick,  to  which  he  never  slips  an  opportunity 
of  recurring  in  season,  and  out  of  season.  The  only  consistent 
declaration  which  would  have  suited  the  author  of  these  epis- 
tles, must  have  been  the  reverse  of  Paul's.  We  preach  not 
Christ  Jesus  the  Lord,  but  so  far  only  as  may  conduce  to  the 
increase  of  our  influence,  and  the  exaltation  of  our  power  ; 
Eay,  for  an  object  so  important,  we  are  not  ashamed  to  preach 
lip  ourselves  your  masters,  with  unbounded  dominion  over 
your  faith,  and  consequently,  over  both  soul  and  body.  For 
surely,  if,  in  the  application  of  words,  any  regard  is  due  to 
proprietv  as  well  as  consistency,  those  only  must  be  called 
masters  who  are  entitled  to  command,  and  those  must  be  ser- 
vants who  are  obliged  to  obey.  There  are  besides  several 
things  in  these  letters  which,  though  expressed  with  simplicity 
of  diction,  I  find  in  meaning  unintelligible.  Such  is  that  in 
his  letter  to  the  Ephesians,  chap,  vi,  ^'  The  more  silent  a  man 
*'  finds  the  bishop,  he  ought  to  reverence  him  the  more."  Con* 
sequently  if,  like  the  Nazianzene  monk,  celebrated  by  Gre- 
gnr\ ,  he  should,  in  praise  of  God,  devote  his  tongue  to  an  in- 
violable taciturnity,  he  would  be  completely  venerable. 
This,  one  would  be  tempted  to  think,  has  originated  from 
some  opulent  ecclesiastick,  who  was  by  far  too  great  a  man 
for  preaching;  at  least  we  may  say,  it  seems  an  oblique 
apologv  for  those  who  have  no  objection  to  any  thing  implied 
in  a  bishcpritk,  except  the  function.  None  v.  hose  notion  of 
the  duties  of  a  bishop  corresponded  v/ith  Isaiah's  idea  of  a 
watchman,  (Ivi,  lO,)  M'oukl  have  thought  dumbness  a  recom- 
mendation. Yet  Ezekiel  did  not  think  his  prophetical  office 
disparaged  by  God's  telling  him,  that  he  had  made  him  a  watch- 
man to  the  house  of  Israel,  (iii,  17.)  I  shall  only  add,  that  if 
I  be  not  perfectly  unprtjudiced  on  this  subject,  the  prejudice 


ECCLESIASTICAL.  EJISTCRY.  1^3 

by  which  I  am  biassed  is  not  against  Ignatiu.s,  but  in  Ms  favour. 
It  is  because  I  think  very  highly  of  the  martyr,  and  have  a 
strong  impression  of  his  virtue,  and  of  the  service  which  his 
sufferings  and  testimony  did  to  the  cause  of  his  master,  that 
I  am  unwilling  rashly  to  attribute  lo  him  what  could  not  fail  to 
lessen  him  in  my  estimation.  I  would  save  him,  if  possible, 
from  a  second  martyrdom  in  his  works,  through  the  attempts 
not  of  open  enemies,  but  of  deceitful  friends. 

But  should  we  admit,  after  all,  in  opposition  to  strong  pre- 
sumptive evidence,  the  entire  genuineness  of  the  letters  in  ques- 
tion, all  that  could  be  fairly  inferred  from  the  concession  is, 
that  the  distinction  of  orders  and  subordination  of  the  presby- 
ters, obtained  about  tvi^enty  or  thirtv  years  earlier  than  I  have 
supposed,  and  that  it  was  a  received  distinction  at  Antioch, 
and  in  Asia  Minor,  before  it  was  known  in  Macedonia  and 
other  parts  of  the  christian  church.  That  its  prevalence  has 
been  gradual,  and  that  its  introduction  has  arisen  from  the 
example  and  influence  of  some  of  the  principal  cities,  is  highly 
probable. 

I  shall  mention  only  one  other  ancient  author  by  whom  the 
three  orders  seem  to  be  discriminated,  and  whose  testimony  is 
commonly  produced  in  support  of  their  apostolical  institution. 
The  author  is  Pius,  bishop  of  Rome,  reckoned  by  the  roman- 
ists  the  ninth  in  succession  from  Peter  and  Paul,  and  conse- 
quently, the  sixth  or  seventh  from  Clement,  for  they  are  not 
entirely  agreed  about  the  order.  All  that  remains  of  him  are 
two  short  letters  to  Justus,  bishop  of  Vienna.  He  is  supposed 
to  have  written  these  a  little  before  the  middle  of  the  second 
century,  but  after  Ignatius  and  Polycarp.  This  comes  so  close 
to  the  time,  when  I  admit  the  distinction  to  have  generally  ob- 
tained, that  even  the  clearest  testimony  from  him,  though  there 
were  no  doubt  as  to  the  authenticity  of  the  letters,  could  not 
be  said  to  weaken  my  hypothesis.  There  is  something  in  his 
words  which  appears  even  to  favoiir  that  hypothesis.  At  the 
same  time  that  they  mark  a  distinction,  they  show  it  to  be  but 
in  its  infancy,  and  not  comparable  to  wh^t  it  arose  to  in  a  few- 
centuries.  Passing  the  obscure  and  indefinite  expression,  colo- 
hio  epiacQporum  ve&tims^  the  only  passage  which  is  apposite  to 
the  question,  is  in  his  second  letter  :  "■  Presbytei-i  et  diaconi 
"  non  ut  majorem,  sed  ut  ministrum  Christi  te  observent." 
"  Let  the  presbyters  and  deacons  reverence  thee  (the  bishop) 
"  not  as  their  superiour,  but  as  Christ's  minister."  I  do  not 
say  that  these  words  imply  that  there  was  no  superiority  in  the 
bishop.  If  there  had  been  none,  I  do  not  think  it  would  have 
been  natural  to  add  the  clause  7ion  ut  major  em.  But  tliey  imply 
that  the  writer  thought  this  difference  too  inconsiderable  to  be 


104  LECTURES  ON 

•a  ground  of  esteem  from  colleagaes  in  the  ministry  ;  and  that 
he  accounted  the  true  foundation  of  their  respect  to  be  supe- 
riour  diligence  in  the  service.  I  believe  it  will  be  admitted  by 
the  impartial  and  intelligent,  that  such  an  expression  from  a 
bishop  (not  to  say  the  bishop  of  Kome)  in  the  fourth  or  fifth 
century,  would  have  been  reckoned  rather  derogator)'  from  the 
authority  of  the  office,  which  woidd  have  been  thought  justly 
entitled  to  respect  and  obedience,  independently  of  the  per- 
sonal merit  of  the  officer. 

But  that  the  two  functions  of  bishop  and  presbyter  were, 
through  the  whole  of  that  age,  occasionally  comprehended 
under  the  same  name,  and  considered  as  one  office,  and  not  two, 
I  sh;dl  show  further,  by  an  example  from  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria, who  wrote  at  the  close  of  the  second  century.  Hav- 
ing observed,  (Strom.  L.  1,)  that  in  most  things  there  are  two 
sorts  of  ministry  ;  the  one  of  a  nobler  nature  than  the  other, 
which  is  subservient ;  and  having  illustrated  this  distinction, 
as  by  other  examples,  so  by  that  of  philosophy  and  physick,  the 
former  of  which  he  considers  as  superiour,  because  it  admi- 
nisters medicine  to  the  soul,  the  latter  as  inferiour,  because  it 
administers  only  to  the  body,  he  adds,  Ofc«<«5  Jv  x.eii  kocIx.  r^t  ikkXh- 
o-itiV',  rt)\  f^ev  jSeAV'wtocjjv  oi  wps(r(iv]ipot  tra^ao-iv  sIkovx  tijv  ujntpe] t)i.i})i  ei  otcuteiaiy 
TccvTXi  uiu/piiTfUi  S'tcttcovieti  ovyyihtu  rt  VTnipijtivlcti  Tea  S-ea,  ttetiet  rtji  rat  zTspf 

•yeivv  oiMvof4,toe.v.  "  Just  SO  in  the  church  the  presbyters  are  in- 
"  trusted  with  the  dignified  ministry,  the  deacons  with  the 
"  subordinate.  Both  kinds  of  service  the  angels  perform  to 
"  God  in  the  administration  of  this  lower  world."  Here  the 
distinction  is  strongly  marked  between  presbyter  and  deacon : 
but  is  it  not  plain  from  his  words,  that  Clement  considered  the 
distinction  between  bishop  and  presbyter  as,  even  in  his  days, 
comparatively  not  worthy  of  his  notice  ? 

But  passing  all  critical  disquisitions  in  regard  to  the  precise 
time  and  manner  of  the  introduction,  as  necessarily  involved 
in  darkness  and  uncertainty,  and  admitting  that  the  distinction 
obtained  generall)^  before  the  middle  of  the  second  century, 
let  us  now  inquire  into  the  nature  of  that  episcopacy  which 
then  came  to  be  established.  It  has  once  and  again  been  ob- 
served passingly,  that  every  church  had  its  own  pastors,  and 
its  own  presb}  tery,  independently  of  every  other  church.  And 
when  one  of  the  presbyters  came  to  be  considered  as  the  pastor 
by  way  of  eminence,  while  the  rest  were  regarded  only  as  his 
assistants,  vicars,  or  curates,  who  acted  under  his  direction  ;  as 
then  every  church  or  congregation  had  but  one  who  was  called 
bishop,  so  every  bishop  had  but  one  congregation  or  church. 
This  is  a  remark  which  deserves  your  particular  notice,  as  it 
regards  an  essential  point  in  the  constitution  of  the  primitive 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  10^ 

tfetweh^  a  point  w,hi.ch  is  generally  admitted  by  those  who  can 
make  any  pretensions  to  the  knowledge  of  christian  antiquities, 
in  the  epistles  written  to  particular  congreg; lions,  or  churches, 
during  the  third  century,  and. in  some  before^  notice  is  almost 
always  taken  of  their  own  bishop  and  presb)  tery,  as  belonging 
specially  to  themselves.  The  great  patrons  of  the  hierarchy, 
who  found  so  much  on  the  testimony  of  Ignatius,  will  not 
den\',  that  on  this  article  he  is  quite  explicit.  The  bishop's 
charge  is,  in  the  primitive  writers,  invariably  denominated 
tmM^t^,  a  church,  or  congregation,  in  the  singular  number, 
pever  ex.KX'/j~ice4^  churches,  or  congregations,  in  the  piuraL 

But  as  this  argument  may  not  appear  so  strong  to  those^ 
who: are  accustomed  to  form  their  opinion  of  things  from  the 
import  of  their  names  in  modern  dialects,  it  will  not  be  amiss 
to  inquire  particularly  into  the  ancient  applications  ot  the 
■word.  Properly  there  are,  in  the  New  Testammt,  but  two 
original  senses  of  the  word  £x>6/sjo-/«-  which  can  be  called  differ- 
ent, though  related.  One  is,  when  it  denotes  a  number  of 
people  actually  assembled,  or  accustomed  to  assemble  tqge** 
ther,  and  is  then  properly  rendered  by  the  English  terms^  con- 
gregation, convention,  assembly,  and  even  sometimes  tri'owd, 
^s  in  Acts  xix.  32,  40.  1  he  other  sense  is  rO  denote  a  society 
united  together  by  some  common  tie,  though  not  convened^ 
perhaps  not  convenable  in  one  place*  And  in  this  acceptation^ 
as  well  as  in  the  former,  it  sometimes  occurs  in  clissical  wri- 
ters, as  signifying  a  state,  or  commonwealth,  and  nearly  tot^ 
responding  to  the  Latin  civkas.  When  the  word  is  limited^ 
or  appropriated,  as  it  generally  is  in  the  New  Testament,  by 
its  regimen,  as  raB-m.  ta  Kvpifi  rs  Xpurla,  or  bv  the  scope  ot  the 
place,  it  is  always  to  be  expli  ned  in  one  or  other  of  the  twd 
sei\ses  following,  corresponding  to  the  two  general  senses  above^ 
mentioned.  It  denotes  either  a  single  congregati.  n  of  chris- 
tians, in  correspondence  to  the  first,  or  the  whole  christian  com« 
muniiy,  in  correspondence  to  the  second.  We  can  hardly  ever 
be  at  a  loss  to  know  from  the  context  which  of  the  two  is  imc 
plied.  That  it  is  in  the  former  acceptation,  is  sometimes  evi- 
■dent  from  the  words  in  construe tion^  as  t>;s  ex.K\i}a-ictg  rv,  ev  K£yp(^fetiit4y 
imd  rtf  sx.Kkiio'ta  ra  S-ea  tfi  £v  K«^<»Sw,  ar^d  the  like.  In  the  latter 
sense  it  ought  always  to  be  understood  when  we  find  nothing 
in  the  expression,  or  in  the  scope  of  the  passage,  to  determine 
us  to  limit  it ;  for  instance  in   the   following,   Et*  'loiv]t]  tj?  ifejfiii 

Tt)  e)Ci(.>a)a-ios..  In  this  last  acceptation  of  the  word,  tor  the  whole 
body  of  Christ's  disciples,  wheresoever  dispersed,  it  came 
afterwards  to  be  distinguished  by  the  epithet  koJ^oXikh.  They 
said  i  t)iK?\tiTiet  i  Kct^eXiKti,  the  catholick  or  universal  church* 

o 


106  ,^^ot^I;b:ctures  oN\ 

Biit  in  any  intermediate  sense,  between  a  single  congregd.* 
tion  and  the  whole  community  of  christians,  not  one  instance 
can  be  brought  of  the  application  of  the  word  in  sacred  writ. 
We  speak  now,  indeed,  (and  this  has  been  the  manner  for  ages) 
of  the  Gallican  church,  the  Greek  church,  the  church  of  Eng- 
land, the  church  of  Scotland,  as  of  societies  independent  and 
complete  in  themselves.  Such  a  phraseology  was  never 
adopted  in  the  days  of  the  apostles.  They  did  not  say  the 
church  of  Asia,  or  the  church  of  Macedonia,  or  the  church  of 
Achaia,  but  the  churches  of  God  in  Asia,  the  churches  in 
Macedonia,  the  churches  in  Achaia.  The  plural  number  is 
invariably  used  when  more  congregations  than  one  are  spoken 
of,  unless  the  subject  be  of  the  whole  commonwealth  of 
Christ.  Nor  is  this  the  manner  of  the  penmen  of  sacred  writ 
only.  It  is  the  constant  usage  of  the  term  in  the  writings  of 
ecclesiastick  authors  for  the  two  first  centuries.  The  only- 
instance  to  the  contrary  that  I  remember  to  have  observed  is 
in  the  epistles  of  Ignatius,  on  which  I  have  already  remarked* 

It  adds  considerable  strength  to  our  argument,  that  this  is 
exactly  conformable  to  the  usage,  in  regard  to  this  term,  which 
had  always  obtained  among  the  Jews.  The  whole  nation,  or 
commonwealth  of  Israel,  was  often  denominated  ot-«5-«  i  etcKXt}<ri» 
Io-f«j)A.  And  after  the  revolt  of  the  ten  tribes,  when  they  ceased 
to  make  one  people  or  state  with  the  other  two,  we  hear  of 
Ts-utrct  i  ey-itXyiu-iat,  la^ot.  This  is  the  large  or  comprehensive  use  of 
the  word  as  above  observed.  In  regard  to  the  more  confined 
application,  the  same  term  fJcxAufr^a  was  also  employed  to  denot« 
a  number  of  people,  either  actually  assembled,  or  wont  to 
assemble,  in  the  same  place.  Thus  all  belonging  to  the  same 
synagogue  were  called  indiflferently  nacXtj^toi,  or  a-vuxyuyyiy  as 
these  words  in  the  Jewish  use  were  nearly  synonymous.  But 
never  did  they  call  the  people  belonging  to  several  neighbour- 
ing synagogues  cKKXii<^tx,  or  a-vvxyayn,  in  the  singular  number, 
but  sKuXnirten,  and  ervyxyuYxi,  in  the  plural.  Any  other  use  in  the 
apostles,  therefore,  must  have  been  as  unprecedented  and  un- 
natural as  it  would  have  been  improper,  and  what  could  not 
fail  to  lead  their  hearers  or  readers  into  mistakes.  There  are 
some  other  differences  between  the  modern  and  the  ancient 
applications  of  this  word,  which  I  shall  take  another  opportu- 
nity of  observing. 

Now  as  one  bishop  is  invariably  considered,  in  the  most  an- 
cient usage,  as  having  only  one  ckkMo-ix,  it  is  manifest  that  his 
inspection  at  first  was  only  over  one  parish.  Indeed,  the  words 
congregation  and  parish  are,  if  not  synonymous,  predicable  of  • 
each  other.  The  former  term  relates  more  properly  to  the 
people  as  actually  congregated,  the  other  relates  to  the  extent 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  ior 

of  ground  which  the  dwelling  houses  of  the  members  of  one 
congregation  occupy.  Accordingly,  the  territory  to  which 
the  bishop's  charge  extended,  was  always  named,  in  the  period 
I  am  speaking  of,  in  Greek  ■sret^tx.tat,  in  Latin  parochia^  or  ra- 
ther paroeda^  which  answers  to  the  English  word  parish^  and 
means  properly  a  neighbourhood. 

Let  it  not  be  imagined  that  I  lay  too  great  stress  on  the  import 
of  words,  whose  significations  in  time  come  insensibly  to  alter. 
It  merits  to  be  observed,  that  in  the  first  application  of  a  name 
to  a  particular  purpose,  there  is  commonly  a  strict  regard  paid 
to  etymology.  As  this  word,  together  with  the  adjective 
vrxpotK^,  vicinus,  neighbouring,  are  conjugates  of  the  verb 
^xpeiKeu,  accolo^jiixta  habitOy  it  can  be  applied  no  otherwise  when 
it  relates  to  place,  than  the  term  parish  is  wiih  us  at  this  day. 
And  this  exactly  agrees  with  the  exposition  of  the  word  given 
by  Stephanus,  that  learned  and  accurate  lexicographer.  "  Ego 
*'  non  parochias  primum,  sed  paroecias  appellatas  esse  censeo  : 
^*  zretpotKoi  enim  sunt  accolse,  quare  qui  fanum  aliquod  accolunt 
*'  paroeci  dicti  sunt,  ejusdem  scilicet  fani  consortes,  etparoecia 
*'  accolarum  conventus  et  accolatus,  sacraque  vicinia,  nam 
**  zrtipaiMt  dicuntur  etiam  ei  TrpoTemet,  id  est  vicini." 
fii^Let  it  be  observed  further,  that  in  those  early  ages  the  bi- 
shop's charge  or  district  was  never  called  hotx.yiirii;  a  diocess» 
concerning  the  import  of  which  I  shall  add  the  following  pas» 
sage  from  the  same  authority.  **  Latini  quoque  utuntur  hoc 
**  vocabulo:  diceceses  vocantes  quasdam  quasi  rainores  provin- 
**  cias,  quas  aliquis,  qui  eis  prsefectus  est,  administrat,  et  in 
*i  quibus  jus  dicit,  unde  et  pontificum  <Ji©<«!j3-f*«,  apud  recenti- 
**  ores."  Thus  in  a  few  ages  afterwards,  when  the  bishop*s 
charge  became  so  extensive  as  more  to  resemble  a  province 
than  a  parish,  nay,  when  in  fact  it  comprised  mimy  churches 
and  parishes  within  it,  the  name  was  changed,  and  it  was  then 
very  properly  called  a  diocess.  The  other  term,  without  de* 
viating  in  the  least  from  its  original  and  proper  import,  re^ 
ceived  anew  application  to  that  which  was  put  under  the  cure 
of  a  presbyter  only. 

But  I  shall  offer  a  few  more  thoughts  on  this  subject  in  Tny 
];iext  prelection,  and  shall  consider  more  particularly  the  con^ni* 
tution  of  the  church,  and  the  powers  of  the  several  ord-vvs  of 
its  miiiisters  in  the  second  and  third  centuriesc, 


108  LECTURES  ON 


LECTURE   Vil. 


XN  some  preceding  discourses,  I  have  considered  the  nature 
anci  different  orders  of  the  ministry  in  the  church  constituted 
by  the  apostles.  Particularly  in  my  last  lecture  on  this  sul> 
ject,  I  entered  on  the  exammation  of  that  which  immediately 
succeeded  it,  and  took  place  in  the  second  and  third  centuries, 
1  observed,  that  before  the  middle  of  the  second  century,  a  sub- 
ordination in  the  ecclesiastick  polity,  which  I  call  primitive 
episcopacy,  began  to  obtain  very  generally  throughout  th$ 
christian  world  ;  every  single  church  or  congregation  having  a 
plurality  of  presbyters,  who,  as  well  as  the  deacons,  were  all 
under  the  superintendency  of  one  pastor  or  bishop,  I  observ- 
ed, that  all  antiquitv  are  unanimous  in  assigning  to  one  bishop 
no  more  than  one  »icxA;j5-<«  or  congregation,  and  one  ■srct^tiyAo.  or 
parish.  For  this  reason,  though  it  was  a  proper  episcopacy, 
in  respect  of  the  disparity  of  the  ministers,  it  was  a  parochial 
episcopacy,  in  respect  of  the  extent  of  the  charge.  I  endea* 
voured  to  set  this  mat<^er  in  a  stronger  light  from  the  consider*, 
ation  of  the  import  of  these  words  ey,x.?^(rioc.  and  TrctfotKtot,  accord* 
ing  to  the  ancient  usage. 

But  that  I  may  not  be  thought  to  depend  too  much  on  the 
signification  of  names  and  words,  I  shall  evince,  beyond  all 
possible  doubt,  that  the  bishop's  cure  was  originally  confined 
to  a  single  church  or  congregation.  This  I  intend  to  show 
from  the  particulars  recorded  in  ancient  authors,  in  relation 
both  to  him  and  to  it.  For  brevity's  sake,  I  shall  not  produce 
the  passages  at  length  from  the  fathers  of  the  second  and  third 
centuries  referred  to,  but  shall  barely  mention  the  principal 
topicks  whi  h  serve  to  vouch  the  fact,  and  which  can  be  veri- 
fied from  the  clearest  and  most  explicit  declarations  of  those 
primitive  writers,  particularly  of  Ignatius,  (for  though  the 
work  ascribed  to  him  is  with  reason  suspected  to  have  been  in- 
terpolated with  a  y'lew  to  aggrandize  the  episcopal  order,  it 
was  never  suspected  of  any  interpolation  with  a  view  to  lessen 
it)  of  Justin  Pviartx  r,  of  Ireneus,  of  Tertullian,  of  Cvprian,  and 
several  others.  Indeed,  the  facts  I  found  upon  are  incontro- 
vertible. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  109 

Now  from  the  writings  of  those  fathers,  it  is  evident,  that 
the  whole  flock  assembled  in  the  same  place,  ctti  to  uvre,  with 
their  bishop  and  presbyters,  as  on  other  occasions,  so  in  par- 
ticular every  Lord's  day,  or  every  Sunday,  as  it  was  com-p 
monly  called,  for  the  purposes  of  publick  worship,  hearing  the 
Scriptures  read,  and  receiving  spiritual  exhortations.  The 
perseverance  in  this  practice  is  warmly  recommended  by  the 
ancients,  and  urged  on  all  the  christian  brethren,  from  the 
consideration  ot'the  propriety  there  is,  that  those  of  the  same 
church  and  parish,  and  under  the  same  bishop,  should  all  join 
in  one  praytr  and  one  supplication,  as  people  who  have  one 
mind  and  one  hope.  For  it  is  argued,  "  if  the  prayer  of  one 
*'  or  two  have  great  efficacy,  how  much  more  efficacious  must 
"  that  be  which  is  made  by  the  bishop  and  the  whole  church. 
"  He,  therefore,  who  doth  not  assemble  with  him  is  denomi- 
"  nated  proud  and  self-condemned."  Again,  as  there  was 
but  one  place  of  meeting,  so  there  was  but  one  communion  ta- 
ble or  altar,  as  they  sometimes  metaphorically  called  it.  "  There 
is  but  one  altar,"  said  Ignatius,  "  as  there  is  but  one  bishop." 

'Ei  Bv<rict?-fipiov  ai  lis  criiTKoTi-®^. 

Nothing  can  be  more  contemptible  than  the  quibbles  which 
some  keen  controvertists  have  employed,  ro  elude  the  force 
of  this  expression.  They  will  have  it  to  import  one  sort  of 
unity  in  the  first  clause,  and  quite  a  different  sort  in  the  se- 
cond,  though  the  second  is  introduced  merely  in  explanation 
hf  the  first.  In  the  first,  say  they,  it  denotes  not  a  numerical, 
but  SI  mystical  unity,  not  one  thing,  but  one  kind  of  ihing  ;  in  the 
second,  one  identical  thing.  One  would  think  it  impossible  for 
a  writer  more  accurately,  by  any  words  to  fix  his  meaning. 
The  illustration  of  one  bishop  puts  it  beyond  question  what  sort 
of  unity  he  ascribes  to  the  altar,  one  altar  as  one  bishop  j  inso- 
much that  if,  in  a  consistency  with  his  assertion,  there  can  be, 
in  one  diocess,  but  one  individual  bishop,  there  can  be,  in 
one  fliocess,  but  one  individual  altar  ;  and  contrariwise,  if  in 
a  consistency  with  his  assertion,  there  may  be,  in  one  diocess, 
many  individual  altars  of  the  same  kind,  there  may  be  also 
many  individual  bishops  of  the  same  kind.  Indeed,  by  their 
mode  of  interpreting,  the  simile  adduced,  so  far  from  tend- 
ing, agreeably  to  the  author's  design,  to  explain  and  illustrate, 
serves  only  to  confound  and  mislead.  What  he  ought  to 
have  said  is  the  reverse  of  what  he  did  say.  He  ought,  on 
that  hypothesis,  to  have  said.  There  is  one  altar,  but  not  as 
there  is  one  bishop,  for  in  regard  to  the  last,  the  bishop,  we 
affirm,  that  there  is  literally  and  properly  but  one  in  a  dio- 
cess ;  in  regard  to  the  first,  the  altar,  we  affirm  the  unity  only 
figuratively  and  improperly,  since,  in  the  literal  sense,  there 
may  be  many.     The  like  chicane  has  been  employed  for  elud- 


tiO^  LECTURES  oisr 

ing  the  argument  founded  on  the  expressions  one  prayer  and 
one  supplication, 

'  But  to  return;  when  the  eucharist  (which  we  more  com- 
pionly  denominate  the  Lord's  supper)  was  celebrated,  the 
whole  people  of  the  parish,  or  bishoprick,  if  you  please  to  call 
it  so,  communicated  in  the  same  congregation,  and  all  receiv- 
ed the  sacrament,  if  not  from  the  hands  of  the  bishop,  at 
least  under  his  eye.  Hence  it  was  that  the  setting  up  another 
altar  within  the  limits  of  his  parish,  beside  the  one  altar  of 
the  bishop,  was  considered  as  the  great  criterion  of  schism. 
And  as  the  whole  of  the  bishop's  parish  generally  received  the 
symbols  of  Christ's  body  and  blood,  mediately  or  immediate- 
ly, from  his  hand,  so  they  were,  for  the  most  part,  baptized, 
either  by  him,  or  in  his  presence.  He  had  also  the  particular 
superintendence  of  all  the  christian  poor,  the  widows,  the 
orphans,  the  strangers,  the  prisoners,  \vithin  the  bounds  of 
his  charge,  and  the  chief  direction  in  the  disposal  of  the  pub- 
lick  charities.  The  testimonials,  or  Uteres  J'ormatce^  as  they 
were  called,  which  private  christians  were  obliged  to  have 
when  removing  from  one  district  to  another,  that  they  might 
be  received  as  brethren  in  other  christian  congregations,  were 
all  signed  by  the  bishop,  in  like  manner  as  with  us  they  are 
signed  by  the  minister  of  the  parish.  Now  all  the  particulars 
above-mentioned  were  considered  as  belonging  to  his  office. 
No  doubt  when,  through  sickness  or  necessary  absence,  he 
could  not  discharge  any  part  himself,  his  place  was  supplied 
by  one  or  more  of  his  presbvters  or  vicars.  Nay,  it  was  even 
thought  befitting,  that  the  bishop  should  know,  by  name, 
every  individual  of  his  flock,  and  that  there  should  not  be  a 
marriage  among  them  without  his  approbation. 

When  all  these  things,  which  are  supported  by  unexcepi 
tionable  testimonies,  are  duly  weighed,  is  it  possible  to  con- 
ceive otherwise  of  the  bishop,  during  the  period  I  am  here 
speaking  of,  than  as  of  the  pastor  of  a  single  parish  ?  He  an- 
swers precisely  to  what,  in  later  times,  has  been  called  thi 
parson  ;  a.  title  of  respect  when  it  first  came  into  use,  though 
I  know  not  how,  through  the  caprice  of  custom,  it  at  present 
conveys  an  idea  of  disrespectful  familiarity.  The  presbyters 
were  his  counsellors  and  assistants,  or,  as  people  would  now 
denominate  them,  his  curates.  I  do  not  pretend  that  this 
resemblance  holds  in  every  particular,  though  it  plainly  does 
In  most.  Perhaps,  in  some  things,  the  case  may  bear  a  great- 
er analogy  to  some  highland  parishes  in  this  northern  part  of 
the  island,  wherein,  by  reason  of  their  territorial  extent,  the 
pastor  is  under  the  necessity  of  having  ordained  itinerant  a^v 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  Hi 

sjatants,  whom  he  can  send,  as  occasion  requires,  to  supply 
his  place  in  the  remote  parts  of  his  charge. 

I'his,  by  the  way,  suggests  the  principal  difference  between 
those  ancient  and  the  greater  part  of  modern  parishes.  In  ge- 
neral (not  indeed  universally)  they  were  larger  in  respect  oT 
territory,  though  even,  in  this  respect,  far  short  of  a  modern 
diocess.  But  it  is  not  so  much  by  the  measure  of  the  ground 
as  by  the  number  of  the  people,  that  the  extent  of  a  pastoral 
charge  is  to  be  reckoned.  Now  that,  in  this  last  respect,  they 
did  not,  at  first,  exceed  modern  parishes,  is  manifest  from  the 
several  particulars  which  have  been  observed  above.  Nay,  if 
every  circumstance  be  considered,  there  is  reason  to  believe 
that  they  were  less.  There  were  yet  no  magnificent  edifices, 
built  for  the  reception  of  christian  assemblies,  such  as  wer^ 
afterwards  reared  at  a  grt'at  expense,  and  called  churches* 
Their  best  accommodatiorj,  for  more  than  a  century,  was  the 
private  houses  of  the  weaithiest  disciples,  which  were  but  ill 
adapted  to  receive  very  nunverpus  conventions.  However,  as 
it  was  but  a  small  part  of  the  people  of  a  city  or  village,  with 
its  environs,  which  composed  the  church,  the  extent  of 
territory,  that  would  be  necessary  to  supply  the  pastor  with 
one  sufficient  congregation,  must  be  so  much  the  greater  ia 
proportion  as  the  number  of  unconverted  Jews  and  Heathens 
would  exceed  the  number  of  converts.  Suppose  at  the  time 
the  churches  were  first  planted  by  the  apostles,  the  christians  at 
a  medium  were  one-thirtieth  part  of  the  people.  This. I  be- 
lieve is  rather  counting  high,  for  in  very  populous  cities,  like 
Rome  and  Alexandria,  we  have  no  reason  to  think  that  they 
amounted  to  one  hundredth  part.  However,  as  in  a  suppo- 
sition of  this  kind,  intended  merely  for  illustration,  there  i$ 
no  occasion  for  historical  exactness  ;  let  the  number  of  chris- 
tians be  reckoned  one  thirtieth  of  the  inhabitants  over  all  Asia 
Minor.  Suppose  further,  that  country  to  have  been  equal 
then,  in  point  of  populousness,  to  what  Great  Britain  is  at, 
present.  One  of  their  bishopricks,  in  order  to  afford  a  con- 
gregation equal  to  that  of  a  middling  parish,  ought  to  have 
been  equal  in  extent  to  thirty  parishes  in  this  island.  Yet  take 
them  at  an  average,  and  they  will  be  fouud  to  have  been  scarce- 
ly equal  to  one-third  of  that  number.  By  the  account  which 
Bingham  gives  us  in  his  Christian  Antiquities,  (b.  ix,  ch,  ii, 
sect.  8,)  an  author  by  no  means  inclined  to  diminish  the  epis- 
copal dignity,  the  whole  forty-eight  bishopricks,  in  the  fourth 
Century,  comprehended  in  the  patriarchate  of  Jerusalem,  were 
no  more  than  equal  to  two  middling  German  diocesses.  And 
as  that  patriarchate  included  three  provinces  under  their  re- 
spective metropolitans,  the  district  of  a  primate,  or  inetrop<s 


112  LECTUllES  ON 

litan,  in  Palestine,  under  whom  there  were  many  bishops, 
wanted  one  third  to  be  of  equal  extent  with  the  precincts  of 
s^n  Ordinary  bishop  in  Germany.  We  may,  however,  form 
some  notion  of  the  origin  of  those  extensive  parishes,  for, 
considered  as  parishes,  they  must  be  called  extensive,  from 
what  happens  in  the  manner  of  proceeding  adopted  by  any 
new  religious  sect,  which  springs  up  amongst  ourselves. 
Where  their  proselytes  are  not  numerous,  the  parishes  or  dis- 
tricts assigned  to  their  ministers  must  be  so  much  the  more 
extended.  In  fact,  they  are  not  less  sometimes,  if  we  reckon 
by  the  distance  of  one  conventicle  from  another,  than  twenty, 
thirty,  or  even  fifty  miles  in  length. 

Bingham  has  observed,  on  the  province  of  Pontus  Polemo- 
niacus,  that  it  comprehended  only  five  diocesses,  and  that  of 
those  Neocesaria,  the  metropolis,  was  no  less  than  a  hundred 
miles  from  Polemonium,  and  sixty  from  Comana,  the  two 
nearest  bishopricks,  or  rather  the  two  nearest  episcopal  resi- 
dences. But  he  has  not  thought  proper  to  observe  also,  what 
Tillemont  hath  shown  from  Basil  and  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  both 
natives  of  Cappudocia,  that,  in  the  middle  of  the  third  cen- 
tury, there  were  no  more  than  seventeen  believers  in  that  ex- 
tensive diocess  :  and  these  probably  all  resided  in  the  city. 
Could  fewer  be  properly  associated  into  one  congregation  ? 

It  deserves  likewise  to  be  remarked,  that  the  largeness,  even 
in  point  of  territor}',  of  those  primitive  parishes  or  diocesses, 
if  you  please  to  call  them  so,  was  more  in  appearance  than  in 
reality.  In  a  particular  province,  I  shall  suppose,  there  were, 
immediately  after  the  first  publication  of  the  gospel,  twelve 
parishes  erected.  This  does  by  no  means  imply,  that  the 
whole  province  was  divided  into  twelve  parishes,  though  this 
is  the  way  in  which  we  too  commonly  understand  it.  There 
might  be,  and  often  were,  many  towns,  and  villages,  and 
tracts  of  land,  in  the  province,  wherein  there  were  no  chris- 
tians at  all,  and  which  therefore  were  not  at  first  considered  as 
belonging  to  any  of  those  parishes.  A  parish  generally  was 
in  fact  no  more  than  one  city  or  village,  with  its  suburbs  and 
environs.  Afterwards,  indeed,  when  in  such  places  as  had 
not  been  originally  included  there  came  to  be  some  christian 
converts,  these  would  naturally  join  themselves  to  the  congre- 
gation assembling  in  the  nearest  town  or  village  j  which, 
agreeably  to  the  fraternal  love  that  then  prevailed  among  the 
disciples  of  Christ,  would  cordially  receive  them.  This  was 
one  principal  cause  of  the  gradual  enlargement  of  parishes, 
as  it  proved  afterwards  the  cause,  (when  Christianity  became 
the  religion  of  the  empire,  and  when,  by  the  sudden  accession 
of  multitudes  of  converts  from  all  quarters,  a  subdivision  of 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  113 

Swhat  appeared  to  be  comprehended  under  the  original  district 
w^as  necessary,  it  then  1  say  proved  the  cause,  that  the  ancient 
parishes,  still  retaining  their  first  naaies,  assumed  the  form  as 
well  as  the  extent  of  diocesses.    But  of  this  more  afterwards. 

I,t  adds  not  a  little  to  the  credibility  of  the  account  now  given, 
that  it  represents  the  christian  churches  as  originally  analo- 
gous, in  point  of  polity,  to  the  Jewish  establishment  of  syna- 
gogues. Nothing  can  be  more  evident  than  that,  in  respect 
of  the  interiour  part,  it  was  the  intention  of  the  founders  of  the 
church  to  adopt,  as  far  as  possible,  thai  model  which,  under 
the  conduct  ol  Providence,  hrid  been  settled  in  Judea,  as  some 
learned  men  think,  by  the  prophet  Ezra.  Certain  it  is,  that 
the  very  names  of  church-officers  were  borrowed  from  the  sy- 
nagogue, which  hnd  also  its  elders,  overseers,  deacons,  or 
almoners  ;  and  amongst  whom  one  usually  presided,  who  was 
called  the  angel  of  the  congregation,  the  title  given  by  our 
Lord  in  the  Apocalvpse  to  the  presidents  of  christian  assem- 
blies. Now  it  is  well  known,  that  among  the  Jews,  every 
synagogue  had  its  own  ministry,  and  was  complete  in  itself, 
having  no  dependency  except  on  the  sanhedrim,  or  supreme 
counsel  of  the  naiion.  Such  a  thing  as  several  synagogues, 
under  the  inspection  of  the  same  minister,  or  ministers,  was 
never  heard  of. 

But  to  return  to  the  administration  of  religious  ordinances 
in  those  primitive  parishes,  let  it  be  observed,  that  though  the 
presbyters  were  all  assistants  to  the  bishop,  in  the  discharge 
of  all  parochial  duties,  the  parish  was  not  then  divided  or  par- 
celled out  among  them  like  a  modern  diocess.  They  all,  with 
their  bishop  and  the  people,  as  was  observed  above,  assembled 
in  one  place,  for  the  publick  offices  of  religion,  "•  For  where 
"  should  the  flock  be,"  says  Ignatius,  "  but  with  their  shep- 
*'  herd  ?"  And  this  title  was  given  to  him  by  way  of  emi- 
nence. The  principal  part  of  the  work  of  the  presbvters,  be- 
side what  belonged  to  their  judicial  capacity  in  the  presbvterv, 
was,  by  the  bishop's  direction,  to  execute  the  less  publick 
parts  of  the  pastoral  function,  as  visiting  the  sick,  instructing 
and  preparing  the  catechumens,  exhorting  the  penitents,  and 
other  such  ministerial  offices  in  those  parts  of  the  parish,  (for 
all  the  presbyters  belonged  in  common  to  the  wholej  to  which 
he  found  it  reasonable  to  send  them.  Thev  also  assisted  him 
in  the  publick  offices  of  religion  ;  and  when  he  was  sick,  or 
otherwise  necessarily  absent,  they  supplied  his  place.  As  the 
charge  of  the  parish  was  eminently  devolved  upon  him,  they 
acted  in  all  the  ministerial  duties  by  his  direction,  or  at  least 
with  his  permission.  The  only  question  of  moment  that  has 
been  raised  on  this  head  is,  whether,  by  his  order  or  allow- 

p 


lU  LECTLfRES  ON 

ance,  they  could  exercise  every  part  of  the  pastoral  office  ai 
well  as  the  bishop,  or  whether  there  were  some  things,  such 
as  ordainilig  others  to  the  ministry,  which  even  his  commands 
could  not  empower  them  to  do.  As  the  power  of  the  bishops 
arose,  and  that  of  the  presbyters  sunk  gradually,  I  am  dispos- 
ed to  think,  that,  in  the  course  of  two  centuries,  or  even  a 
century  and  a  half,  there  was  a  considerable  diflference,  in  this 
respect,  in  the  state  of  things,  at  the  beginning  and  at  the  end* 
Towards  the  conclusion  of  that  period  I  imagine,  it  became 
very  unusual  for  a  bishop  to  delegate  this,  which  was  ever 
looked  LI  pan  as  the  most  sacred  and  most  momentous  trust,  to  his 
presbyters.  The  transition  is  very  natural  from  seldom  to  we- 
ver  ;  and,  in  our  ways  of  judging,  the  transition  is  as  natural 
from  what  never  is  clone,  to  what  cannot  lawfully  be  done. 

We  know  that  some  time  after  the  period  to  which  1  have 
here  confined  myself,  ordination  by  presbyters  was  prohibited, 
and  declared  null  by  ecclesiastical  canons.  But  the  very  pro- 
hibitions themselves,  the  verv  assertions  of  those  whom  they 
condemned  as  hereticks,  prove  the  practice,  then  probably 
wearing,  but  not  quite  worn  out.  There  was  no  occasion  for 
making  canons  against  ordination  by  deacons,  or  by  laymen, 
who  did  not  pretend  to  such  a  right.  In  deference,  however, 
to  the  apostle  Paul's  authority,  the  bishop  still  admitted,  and 
even  required,  all  the  presbyters  present  to  join  with  him  in 
ordaining  a  presbyter,  by  the  imposition  of  their  hands  with 
his,  but  not  in  ordaining  a  bishop.  They  did  not  reflect,  that 
in  the  only  instance  mentioned  by  Paul,  the  presbytery  had 
assisted  in  ordaining  an  evangelist,  an  extraordinary  minister, 
even  superiour  to  a  bishop.  The  arbitrary  supposition  of 
Chrysostom,  who  was  himself  a  bishop  and  a  patriarch,  about 
four  hundred  years  afterwards,  when  things  were  on  a  very  differ- 
ent footing,  and  when  the  episcopate,  on  account  of  the  wealth 
and  secular  power  that  accompanied  it,  was  become  a  great 
object  of  ambition,  (Chrysostora's  supposition)  that  by  the 
presbytery  the  apostle  meant  a  synod  of  bishops,  a  notion  to- 
tally unsupported  by  evidence,  and  repugnant  to  the  uniform 
usage  of  the  term  in  christian  antiquity,  has  hardly  merit 
enough  to  entitle  it  to  be  mentioned. 

But  that,  about  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  the  presby- 
ters were  still  considered  jis  vested  with  the  power  of  confer- 
ring orders,  has  been  plausibly  argued  from  an  expression  of 
Firmilian,  in  his  letter  to  Cyprian  :  ^  Quando  omnis  potestas 
"  et  gratia  in  ecclesia  constituta  sit,  ubi  praesident  majores  natu, 
*'  qui  et  baptizandi,  et  manum  imponendi,  et  ordinandi  possi- 
"  dert  potestatem."  Cypr.  Epist.  75^  in  some  editions  the  43d. 
That  by  majorca  natu^  in  Latin,  is  meant  the  same  withOT^f£<rCt)7s- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  115 

fot  in  Greek,  of  which  it  is  indeed  a  literal  version,  can  scarce- 
ly  be  thought  questionable.  Besides,  the  phnise  so  exactly 
coincides  with  that  of  i'ertullian,  who  says,  "  Probati  praesi- 
"  dent  seniores,"  approved  elders  preside,  as  to  make  the  ap- 
plication, if  possible,  still  clearer.  Indeed,  if  we  were  not  to 
consider  the  latin,  majores  natu,  as  meant  to  correspond  to  the 
Greek,  TrftaCvhfoi^  the  only  translation  we  could  give  to  the 
phrase,  used  by  Firmilian,  would  be,  "  where  old  men  pre- 
"  side  ;"  an  afhrmation  which  could  hardU'  ever  have  been  in 
such  general  terms  given  with  truth.  For  when  the  canonical 
age  of  bishops  came  to  be  established,  it  was  no  more  than 
thirty ;  and  it  is  a  certain  f^ct,  that,  both  before  and  after  that 
canon,  several  were  ordained  younger.  I  am  far  from  think- 
ing, that  under  this  term,  majores  natu,  those  who  were  then 
peculiarly  called  bishops  are  not  included,  or  even  principally 
intended  ;  but  what  I  maintain  is,  that,  now  that  the  distinc- 
tion had  obtained,  the  use  of  so  comprehensive  a  term  seems 
sufficiently  to  show,  that  it  was  not  his  intention  to  affirm  it  of 
the  latter  order,  exclusively  of  the  former,  else  he  would  never 
have  employed  a  word  which,  when  used  strictly^  was  appropri- 
ated to  the  former  order,  and  not  to  the  latter.  Thus  the  name 
priests.,  in  English,  in  the  plural  number,  is  ofcen  adopted  to 
denote  the  clergy  in  general,  both  bishops  and  priests.  But 
no  intelligent  person,  that  understands  the  language,  and  does 
not  intend  to  deceive,  would  express  himself  in  this  manner; 
"  In  the  church  of  England,  the  priests  have  the  power  of 
*'  baptizing,  confirming,  and  ordaining."  Nor  could  he  ex- 
cuse himself  by  pretending,  that  in  regard  to  the  two  last 
articles,  he  meant  by  the  word  priests  the  bishops,  exclusivelv 
of  those  more  commonly,  and  for  distinction's  sake,  called 
priests.  Yet  the  two  cases  are  exactly  parallel ;  for,  in  Firmi- 
lian's  time,  the  distinction  of  the  three  orders  was,  though  not 
so  considerable,  as  well  known  b)'  the  christians  in  Cappadocia, 
and  in  Africa,  as  they  are  at  this  day  m  England.  This  also 
serves  to  show,  how  little  truth  there  is  in  that  observation  of 
Uodwell's,  quoted  in  a  former  discoui-se,  that  from  Ignatius' 
time,  the  distinction  of  the  names  was  most  accurately  observ- 
ed by  all  christian  writers. 

As  another  eminent  authority  I  shall  produce  Cyprian.  I 
recur  to  him  the  more  willingly,  because  he  is  held  the  great 
apostle  of  high-church.  Cyprian's  own  words,  in  Epist.  5, 
directed  to  his  presbyters  and  deacons  at  Carthage,  when  he 
himself  for  some  time  found  it  necessary  to  retire,  are  these  : 
"  Quoniam  mihi  interesse  nunc  non  permittit  loci  conditio, 
^'  peto  vos  pro  fide  et  religione  vestra,  fungamini  illic  et  ves- 
*'  tris  partibus  et  naeis,  ut  nihil  vel  ad  disciplinam  vel  ad  djli- 


115  LECTURES  ON 

^*  gentiam  desit."  Is  it  to  be  supposed,  that  be  v/ould  have  so 
expressly  enjoined  them,  .vithoat  exception  or  limitation,  to 
discharge  the  duties  of  his  function  as  well  as  their  own,  if 
neither  presbyters  nor  deacons  could  do  any  thing  in  ordina- 
tion, thai  part  which  as  the  chief  of  ail  i  Na}',  might  it  not 
be  justly  thought,  that  it  he  meant  to  except  this,  ht  would 
have  given  them  some  hint  in  that  letter,  what  method,  in 
case  of  any  vacan^  y  in  their  presbytery,  (which,  during  his  ab- 
sence, would  be  doubly  incommodious)  they  should  take,  to  get 
it  quickly  and  properly  supplied  ?  but  his  general  rule  for  the 
removal  of  all  doubts,  and  which  renders  the  descending  to 
particulars  unnecessary  is,  that  they  are  to  discharge  his  of- 
fice, and  their  own. 

To  come  to  the  writers  of  the  age  that  succeeded,  the  first 
I  shall  mention  is  Hilary,  a  Roman  deacon,  whom  I  had  occa- 
sion to  mention  once  betore,  who  wrote  a  commentary  upon 
Paul's  epistles,  about  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century.  His 
works  are  always  bound  up  with  those  of  Ambrose,  bishop  of 
JViilan  ;  and,  by  some  blunder  in  the  editors,  continue  to  pass 
under  his  name.  He  is  sometimes  quoted  by  moderns  under 
the  name  of  Pseudambrose  and  Ainbrosiaster.  Of  his  com- 
mentarv  Sixtus  de  Sienna  has  given  this  character:  "In  om- 
"  nes  Pauli  epistolas  libri  quatuordecim,  breves  quidem  in 
"  verbis,  sed  sentcntiarum  pondere  graves  ;^'  which  is  entirely 
approved  by  Richard  Simon,  of  the  oratory,  (Hist.  Crit.  du 
Nouveau  Test.  p.  3,  chap,  ix,)  who  adds,  "  There  are  few 
"  ancient  commentaries  or.  the  epistles  of  St.  Paul,  and  even 
"  on  the  whole  New  lestament,  which  can  be  compared  with 
"this."  Ihis  commentator,  in  his  exposition  of  the  third 
chapter  of  the  first  epistle  to  I  imothy,  has  these  words  : 
"  Post  episcopum  tamen  diaconi  ordinationem  subjecit. 
"  Quare  ?  nisi  quia  episcopi  et  presbyteri  una  ordinatio  est  ? 
"  Uterque  enim  sacerdos  est.  Sed  episcopus  primus  est ;  ut 
"  omnis  episcopus  presb}  ter  sit,  non  omnis  presbyter  episco- 
"  pus.  Hie  enim  episcopus  est,  qui  inter  presbyteros  primus 
"  est.  Denique  Timotheum  presb-  terum  ordinatum  signifi- 
"  cat,  sed  quia  ante  se  alterum  non  habebat,  episcopus  erat." 
Nothing  ran  be  more  evident,  than  thiU  the  whole  distinction 
of  the  episcopate  is  here  ascribed  to  senioritv  in  the  ministry, 
without  either  election  or  special  ordination.  When  the  bishop 
died,  the  senior  colleague  succeeded  of  course.  As  to  ordi- 
nation, it  was  the  same  in  both  ;  and  bishop  meant  no  more 
than  first  among  the  presbyters,  or  the  senior  presbvter.  This 
is  verv  probably  the  footing  on  which  the  preccdencA  in  the 
presbvtery  originally  stood,  though  it  did  not  long  remain  so. 
It  was  out  of  the  earliest  converts  that  the  first  pastors  were 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  lir 

chosen  ;  jindnhe  conclusion  is  analogical,  that  the  oldest  pastor 
wouici  .'C  entitled  to  preside. 

Aiiotiier.  witness  whom  I  shall  adduce  is  jerom,  who  wrote 
about  the  eAd  of  rhc  iourth  century,  and  the  beginning  ol  the 
fitth.<-  ■'i'iie  tcstimuny  which  I  shall  bring  iroin  him,  regards 
the  pructice  that  had  long  subsisted  at  Alexandria.  1  shall 
•give  you  ihe  passage  in  his  own  words  from  his  epistle  to  Eva- 
■gvius^'  '^'■.Akxauurise  a  Marco  evangelista  usque  ad  Heraclam 
'^  et  Dionysium  episcupos,  presbyteri  semper  unum  ex  se  elec- 
**■  tuni,  iuexcelsiori  gradu  collocatum,  episcopum  nominabunt : 
"■  quomodo  si  exercitus  imperatorem  facial :  aut  diaconi  eli- 
'^  g^nt  de  se  qutm  industrium  noverint,  et  archidiaconum 
"  vocent."  1  know  it  has  been  said,  that  this  relates  only  to 
the  election  of  ihe  bishop  of  Alexandria,  and  not  to  his  ordi 
nation.  i  o  me  it  is  manifest  that  it  relates  to  both  j  or,  to  ex- 
press myself  with  greater  precision,  it  was  the  intention  of 
that  father  to  signify,  that  no  other  ordination  than  this  elec- 
tion, and  those  ceremonies  with  which  the  presbyters  might 
please  to  accompany  it,  such  as  the  instalment  and  salutation, 
was  then  and  there  thought  necessary  to  one  who  had  been 
ordained  a  presbyter  before  ;  that  according  to  the  usage  of 
that  church,  this  form  was  all  that  was  requisite  to  constitute 
one  of  the  presbyters  their  bishop.  But  as  lam  sensible,  that 
unsupported  assertions  are  entitled  to  no  regard  on  either  side, 
I  shall  assign  my  reasons  from  the  author's  own  words,  and 
then  leave  everyone  to  judge  for  himself. 

Jerom,  in  the  preceding  part  of  this  letter,  had  been  main- 
taining, in  opposition  to  some  deacon,  who  had  toolislily  boast- 
ed of  the  order  of  deacons  as  being  superiour  to  the  order  of 
presbyters,  Jerom,  I  say,  had  been  maintaining,  that  in  the 
original  and  apostolical  constitution  of  the  church,  bishop  and 
presbyter  were  but  two  names  for  the  same  office.  That  ve 
may  be  satisfied  that  what  he  says  implies  no  less,  I  shall  give 
it  vou  in  his  own  words. — "  Audio  quendam  in  tantarn  tru- 
*'  pisse  vecordiam,  ut  diaconas  presbjteris,  id  est  episcopis, 
*'  anteferret.  Nam  cum  apostolus  perspicue  doceat  eosdem 
*'  esse  presbyteros  quos  episcopos,  quid  patitur  mensarum  et 
"  viduarum  minister,  ut  supra  eos,  se  tumidns  efferat."  For 
this  purpose  he  had,  in  a  cursory  manner,  pointed  out  some  of 
those  arguments  from  the  New  Testament,  which  I  took  occa- 
sion, in  a  former  discourse,  to  illustrate.  In  regard  to  the 
introduction  of  the  episcopal  order,  as  then  commonlv  under- 
stood, in  contradistinction  to  that  of  presbyter,  he  signifies, 
that  it  did  not  exist  from  the  beginning,  but  was  merely  an 
expedient  devised  after  the  times  of  the  apostles,  in  order  the 


118  LECTURES  ON 

Baore  efFectualiy  to  preserve  unity  in  every  church,  as  in  case- 
of  diiFerences  among  the  pastors^  it  would  be  of  importance  to 
have  one  acknowledged  superiour,  in  whose  determination  they 
were  bound  to  acquiesce.  His  words  are  : — "  Quod  autem 
'^'- postea  P  he  had  been  speaking  immediately  before  of  the 
times  of  the  apostles,  "-  unus  electus  est,  qui  caeteris  prepone- 
**  retur,  in  schismatis  remedium  factum  est,  ne  unus  quisque 
**  ad  se  trahens,  Christi  eccltsiam  rumperet,"  Then  follows 
the  passage  quoted  above  concerning  the  church  of  Alexan- 
dria. Nothing  can  be  plainer  than  that  he  is  giving  an  account 
of  the  first  introduction  of  the  episcopate,  (as  the  word  was 
then  understood)  which  he  had  been  maintaining  was  not  a 
difierejit  order  from  that  of  presbyter,  but  merely  a  certain 
pre-eminence  conferred  by  election,  for  the  expedient  purpose 
of  preventing  schism.  And  in  confirmation  of  what  he  had 
advanced,  that  this  election  was  all  that  at  first  was  requisite, 
he  tells  the  story  of  the  manner  that  had  long  been  practised 
and  held  sufficient  for  constituting  a  bishop  in  the  metropolis  of 
Eg)pt.  It  is  accordingly  introduced  thus  :  ''  Navn  et  Alexan- 
"  driae,"  as  a  case  eniirely  apposite,  to  wit,  an  instance  of  a 
eburch  in  which  a  simple  election  had  continued  to  be  account- 
ed sufficient  for  a  longer  time  ihan  in  other  churches,  an 
insviirsce  which  had  rf^mained  a  vestige  and  evidence  of  the 
once  universal  practice. 

Now  if  he  meant  only  to  tell  us,  as  some  would  have  it, 
that  there  the  election  of  the  bishop  was  in  the  presbyters, 
there  was  no  occasion  to  recur  to  Alex.mdiia  for  an  example, 
or  to  a  former  period,  as  that  continued  still  to  be  a  very  com- 
mon, if  not  the  general,  practice  throughout  the  church.  And 
though  it  be  allowed  to  have  been  still  the  custom  in  most 
places,  to  get  also  the  concurrence  or  consent  of  the  people, 
this  shovi's  more  strongly  how  frivolous  the  argument  trom 
their  being  electors  would  have  been  in  favour  of  presbyters, 
as  equal  in  point  of  order  to  bishops,  and  consequently  supe- 
riour to  deacons  ;  since,  in  regard  to  most  places,  as  much  a» 
this  could  be  said  concerning  those  who  are  inferiour  to  dea- 
eons,  the  very  meanest  of  the  people,  who  had  all  a  suffrage  in 
the  election  of  their  bishop.  But  understood  in  the  way  I 
have  explained  it,  the  argument  has  both  sense  and  strength  in 
it,  and  is  in  effect  as  follows : — There  can  be  no  essential  dif- 
ference between  the  order  of  bishop,  and  that  of  presbyter, 
since,  to  make  a  bishop,  nothing  more  was  necessary  at  first 
(and  of  this  practice  the  church  of  Alexandria  remained  long 
an  example)  than  the  nomination  of  his  fellow  presbyters  ;  and 
no  ceremony  of  consecration  was  required,  but  what  was  per- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  1 19 

formed  by  them,  and  consisted  chiefly  in  placing  him  in  a  high- 
er seat,  and  saluting  him  bishop*. 

Add  to  this,  that  the  very  examples  this  father  makes  use  of 
for  illustration,  show  manifestly,  that  his  meaning  must  have 
been  as  I  have  represented  it.  fiis  first  instance  is  the  elec- 
tion of  an  emperour  by  the  army,  which  he  calls  expressly 
making  an  emperour.  And  is  it  not  a  matter  of  publick  noto- 
riety, that  the  emperours,  raised  in  this  manner,  did,  from  that 
moment,  without  waiting  any  other  inauguration,  assume  the 
imperial  titles,  and  exercise  the  imperial  power?  And  did 
they  not  treat  all  as  rebels  who  opposed  ihem  ?  If  possible,  the 
Other  example  is  still  more  decisive.  I'o  constitute  an  arch- 
deacon in  the  sense  in  which  the  word  was  then  used,  no  other 
form  of  investiture  was  necessary,  but  his  election,  which  was 
in  Jerom's  time  solely  in  his  fellow  deacons  ;  though  this  also, 
with  many  other  things,  came  afterwards  into  the  hands  of  the 
bishop.  By  this  example  he  also  very  plainly  acquaints  uSi, 
that  the  bishop  originally  stood  in  the  same  relation  to  the 
presbyters,  in  which  the  archdeacon,  in  his  own  time,  did  to 
the  other  deacons,  and  was  by  consequence  no  other  than  what 
the  archpresbyter  came  to  be  afterwards,  the  first  among  the 
presbyters. 

But  does  not  Jerom,  after  all,  admit,  in  the  very  next  sen- 
tence, the  superiority  of  bishops  in  the  exclusive  privik  ge  of 
ordaining  ?  True  :  he  admits  it  as  a  distinction  that  then  ac- 
tually obtained  ;  but  the  whole  preceding  part  of  his  letter  was 
written  to  evince,  that  from  the  beginning  it  was  not  so. 
From  ancient  times  he  descends  to  times  then  modern,  and 
from  distant  countries  he  comes  to  his  own;  concluding,  that 
still  there  was  but  one  article  of  moment  whereby  thjtir  powers 
were  discriminated.  "  Quid  enim  tacit,  excepta  ordinatione, 
"  episcopus,  quod  presbyter  non  faciat?"  This  indeed  proves 
sufficiently,  that  at  that  time  presbyters  were  not  allowed  to 
ordain.  But  it  can  prove  nothing  more,  for  in  regard  to  his 
sentiments  about  the  rise  of  this  difference,  it  was  impossible 
to  be  more  explicit  than  he  had  been  through  the  whole  epis- 
tle. I  shall  only  add,  that  for  my  part  I  cannot  conceive  ano- 
ther interpretation,  that  can  give  either  weight  to  his  argument, 
or  consistency  to  his  words.  The  interpretation  I  have  given 
does  both,  and  that  without  any  violence  to  the  expression. 

•  Was  ever  any  thing  more  frivolous  than  Pearson's  criticism  on  the  dis*' 
tinciion  between  <i  se  and  ex  se,  the  phrase  used  in  the  above  quotationf  ?  Qr 
could  any  thing  be  conceived  more  foreign  to  Jerom's  purpose,  than  the  whole 
Ijassage,  as  the  bis-liop  has  thought  fit  to  interpret  it? 

+  Vindicia:  Ignatianz,  p.  1,  c.  x. 


120  LECTURES  ON 

I  might  plead  Jerom's  opinion  in  this  case — I  do  plead  only 
his  testimony.  1  say  1  might  plead  his  opinion  as  the  opinion 
of  one  who  lived  in  an  age  when  the  iavestigation  of  the  origin 
of  any  ecclesiastical  order,  or  custom,  must  have  been  incompa- 
rably easier  thin  it  can  be  to  us  at*this  distance  of  rime.  I 
might  plead  his  opinion,  as  the  opinion  of  a  man  who  had  more 
erudition  than  any  person  then  in  ihe  church,  the  greatest  lin- 
guist, the  greatest  critick,  the  greatest  antiqu.iry  of  them  all. 
But  I  am  no  friend  to  an  implicit  deference  to  human  autho- 
rity in  matters  of  opinion.  Let  his  sentiments  be  no  further 
regarded,  than  the  reasons  by  which  the\  are  supported  are 
found  to  be  good.  I  do  plead  oni\  his  testimony,  as  a  testi- 
mony in  relation  to  a  matter  of  fact,  both  recent  and  noto- 
rious ;  since  it  regarded  the  then  late  uniform  practice  of  the 
church  of  Alexandria,  a  city,  which,  before  Constantinople  be- 
came the  seat  of  empire,  was,  next  to  Rome,  the  most  eminent 
in  the  christian  world.  To  the  same  purpose  the  testimony 
of  the  Alexandrian  patriarch  Eutychius  has  been  pleaded, 
who,  in  his  annals  of  that  church,  takes  notice  of  the  same 
practice,  but  with  greater  particularity  of  circumstances 
than  had  been  done  by  Jerom.  Eutychius  tells  us,  that  the 
number  of  presbyters  therein  was  alwavs  twelve  ;  and  that,  on 
occasion  of  a  vacancy  in  the  episcopal  chair,  they  chose  one 
of  themselves,  whom  the  remaining  eleven  ordained  bishop  by 
imposition  of  hands  and  benediction.  In  these  points,  it  is 
evident,  there  is  nothing  that  can  be  said  to  contradict  the 
testimony  of  Jerom.  All  that  can  be  affirmed  is,  that  the  one 
mentions  particulars  about  which  the  other  had  been  silent. 
But  it  will  be  said,  there  is  one  circumstance,  the  duration  as- 
signed to  this  custom,  wherein  there  seems  to  be  a  real  con- 
tradiction. Jerom  brings  it  no  farther  down  than  Heracla  and 
Dionysius  ;  whereas  Eutychius  represents  it  as  continuing  to 
the  time  of  Alexander,  about  fifts'  years  later.  Now  it  is  not 
impossible,  that  a  circumstantiated  custom  might  have  been 
in  part  abolished  at  one  time,  and  in  part  at  another.  But  ad- 
mit that  in  this  point,  the  two  testimonies  are  contradictory, 
that  will  by  no  means  invalidate  their  credibility  as  to  those 
points  on  which  they  are  agreed.  The  difference,  on  the  con- 
trary, as  it  is  an  evidence,  that  the  last  did  not  copy  from  the 
first,  and  that  they  are  therefore  two  witnesses,  and  nor  one, 
serves  rather  as  a  confirmation  of  the  truth  of  those  P.rticlgs 
wherein  they  concur.  And  this  is  our  ordinarv  method"  of 
judging  in  all  matters  depending  on  human  testimony.  "That 
Jerom,  who  probably  spoke  from  memory,  though  certain  as 
to  the  main  point,  might  be  somewhat  doubtful  ;".s  to  the  pre- 
cise time  of  the  abolition  of  the  custom,  is  rendered  even  pro- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  121 

bable  bv  him  mentioning,  with  a  view  to  mark  the  expiration 
of  the  practice,  two  successive  bishops  rather  than  one.  For 
if  he  had  known  certainly  that  it  ended  with  Heracla,  there 
vrould  have  been  no  occasion  to  mention  Dionysius  ;  and  if  he 
had  been  assured  of  its  continuance  to  the  time  of  DionN  sius, 
there  would  have  been  no  propriety  in  mentioning  Heracla. 

Some  have  inferred  from  a  passage  of  Tertuiiian,  that,  how- 
ever general  the  practice  was  in  the  second  and  subsequent 
centuries,  of  settling  in  every  church  all  the  three  orders 
above  explained,  it  was  not  universal  that  in  parishes,  where 
there  were  but  a  few  christians  remotely  situated  from  other 
churches,  it  was  judged  sufficient  to  give  them  a  pastor  or  bi- 
shop only,  and  some  deacons.  The  presbyters  then  being  but 
a  sort  of  assistants  to  the  bishop,  might  not,  in  very  small 
charges,  be  judged  necessary.  The  thing  is  not  in  itself  im- 
probable, and  the  authority  above-mentioned,  before  I  had  ex- 
amined it,  or  seen  a  more  accurate  edition,  led  me  to  conclude 
it  real.  But  on  examination  I  find,  that  what  had  drawn  me 
and  others  into  this  opinion,  was  no  more  than  a  false  reading 
of  a  sentence  quoted  in  a  former  lecture.  In  some  editions  of 
Tertuiiian  we  read,  (De  exhort,  cast.)  "  Ubi  ecclesiasiici  or- 
"  nis  non  est  consessus,  et  offert,  et  tinguit,  sacerdos  qui  eat 
*'  ibi  solus."  I  need  not  urge  that  the  expression  is  quite  dif- 
ferent in  all  the  best  manuscripts,  and  most  correct  editions : 
this  being  one  of  those  glaring  corruptions,  which,  after  a 
careful  perusal,  betray  themselves  to  an  attentive  reader  of 
any  penetration.  The  words,  as  I  have  now  transcribed  them, 
considered  in  connexion  with  the  subject  treated  in  the  context, 
have  neither  sense  nor  coherence  in  them,  whereas  nothing  can 
be  more  apposite  to  the  author's  argument  than  they  are  in  the 
way  formerly  quoted,  "  Ubi  ecclesiastici  ordinis  non  est  con- 
sessus et  offers,  et  tinguis,  et  sacerdos  es  tibi  solus."  So  sen- 
sible of  this  were  the  two  learned  criticks,  Petavius  and  Dod- 
well,  that  though  both  were  violently  disposed  in  their  differ- 
ent ways  to  pervert  the  meaning,  neither  thought  proper  to 
avail  himself  of  a  variation  in  the  reading,  which  would  have 
removed  at  once  what  to  them  was  a  great  stumbling-block. 
It  is  indeed  a  reading  which  savours  more  of  art  than  of  neg- 
ligence, and  has  much  the  appearance  of  those  inquisitorial 
corrections  which  were  made  on  several  ancient  books  in  the 
sixteenth  century,  especially  those  published  in  the  papal  domi- 
nions, or  where  the  holy  office  was  established,  in  order  to  adapt 
the  ancient  doctrine  to  the  orthodoxy  of  the  day.  Now  no- 
thing could  be  more  opposite  to  this,  than  what  seemed  to  ad- 
litiit,  that  any  necessity  or  exigence  whatever  could  entitle:  a 

Q 


122  LECTURES  ON 

layman  to  exercise  the  functions  of  a  priest.— But  this  by  the 
way. 

The  opinion  of  Dr.  Hammond,  (Annotations,  Acts  xi,  30,) 
that  the  apostles  instituted  only  the  office  of  bishop  and  dea- 
con, and  that  the  intermediate  office  of  presbyter  was  soon  af- 
terwards introduced,  is  not  materially  different  from  the  doc- 
trine which  I  endeavoured,  in  a  preceding  lecture,  to  prove 
from  the  New  Testaments  Provided  it  be  allowed,  that  the 
ministry,  according  to  the  apostolical  arrangement,  consisted 
of  two  orders,  and  not  of  three,  the  one  properly  the  ministry 
of  the  word,  the  other  the  ministry  of  tables,  it  would  be  no 
better  than  logomachy,  or  altercation  about  words,  to  dispute 
whether  the  minister  of  the  former  kind  should  be  called  bi- 
shop, or  presbyter,  since  it  is  evident,  that  these  names  were 
used  synonymously  by  the  inspired  writers.  Were  we  'to  be 
confined  to  one  term,  I  should  readily  admit,  that  the  first  is 
the  more  proper  of  the  two.  The  name  s^r/c-xaTr®^,  bishop,  in- 
spector, strictly  expresses  the  charge  of  a  flock  ;  the  term  7i-p$i- 
^v]ep(^,  presbyter,  elder,  senator,  is  a  title  of  respect  which  has 
been  variously  applied.  And  in  the  ecclesiastick  use  it  has 
been  rendered  ambiguous,  by  having  been  so  long  misap- 
plied to  a  kind  of  subordinate  ministry,  which  the  true  presby- 
terian  maintains,  with  Jerom,  was  not  from  the  beginning  in 
the  church.  The  only  material  difference  between  the  doc- 
tor's sentiments  and  mine,  on  this  article,  is  the  following. 
That  very  learned  and  pious  author,  misled,  as  I  imagine, 
more  by  the  dialect  of  ecclesiastick  writers,  when  the  distmc- 
tion  had  actually  obtained,  than  by  the  practice  of  the  primi- 
tive church,  rightly  understood,  maintains  that  there  was  no 
more  than  one  bishop  or  pastor  allotted  to  every  church, 
whereas,  in  my  judgment,  there  were  allotted  several.  No- 
thing can  be  more  incompatible  than  his  opinion,  in  this  parti- 
cular, with  the  style  of  the  sacred  penmen,  to  which,  in  sup- 
port of  that  opinion,  he  is  perpetually  doing  violence  in  his 
commentary.  Admitting  that  the  phrases  xccT  ekxPuj^/^v,  and 
Kxlct  7roX(V'  may  be  rendered,  as  he  affirms,  church  by  churchy  and 
city  by  city^  and  that  consequently  what  is  called,  in  the  com- 
mon translation,  "  ordaining  eiders  or  bishops  in  every  city, 
^'-  or  in  every  church,"  may  be  understood  to  imply  one  in 
each,  what  shall  be  said  of  the  many  passages  not  in  the  least 
ambiguous,  wherein  mention  is  made  of  the  pastors  in  the 
plural  number  of  but  one  church  ?  Sometimes  they  are  de- 
nominated bishops,  sometimes  presbyters,  sometimes  those 
that  are  over  them,  their  guides  or  directors  in  the  Lord.  In- 
deed, what  we  are  told,  (Acts  xx,  17,)  that  Paul  sent  from  Mile- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  12^3 

tus  to  Ephesus, and  called  the  elders  of  the  church,  might  (if  there 
were  not  another  passage  to  this  purpose)  serve  as  a  sufficient 
confutation  of  that  hypothesis.  "  Ay  but,"  replies  our  anno- 
tator,  "  by  the  church  is  here  meant  not  the  single  church  of 
*'  the  city  of  Ephesus,  but  the  metropolitical  church  of  Asia,*'. 
Is  it  possible,  that  a  man  of  Dr.  Hammond's  erudition  and 
discernment,  should  have  been  so  little  acquainted  with,  or  at- 
tentive to  the  idiom  not  only  of  all  the  inspired,  but  of  all  the 
ecclesiastical,  writers  of  the  two  first  centuries,  as,  in  support 
of  his  interpretation,  to  recur  to  such  an  unexampled  phraseo- 
logy ?  Where  will  he  find  all  the  churches  of  a  province  ac 
country  called  the  church  of  a  particular  city  ?  But  if  there 
were  nothing  incongruous  in  the  phrase,  there  is  an  absurdity 
in  the  supposition.  How  could  the  apostle  expect  to  find  at 
Ephesus  all  the  bishops  of  Asia  ?  Or  was  he,  though  in  so 
great  haste  to  get  to  Jerusalem  before  Pentecost,  that  he  could 
not  conveniently  go  to  Ephesus  himself,  was  he,  I  say,  to  wait 
till  expresses  were  sent  thence  by  the  metropolitan  throughout 
that  extensive  region,  and  till,  in  consequence  of  this  summon.s, 
all  the  Asiatick  bishops  were  convened  ac  Miletus  ?  By  this 
strange  way  of  wresting  the  plainest  words,  the  saints  at  Phi- 
lippi  (p.  1,1,)  are  in  another  place  made  to  mean  all  the  chris- 
tians in  Macedonia  ;  and,  by  parity  of  reason,  I  acknowledge, 
the  bishops  and  deacons  of  Philippi  are  all  those  in  the  holy 
ministry  throughout  the  Macedonian  kingdom.  But  as  am- 
plification does  not  always  answer,  the  opposite  method  is 
sometimes  found  convenient.  When  James  (Jam.  v,  14,)  en- 
joins  the  sick  person  to  send  for  the  elders  of  the  church,  he 
means,  according  to  our  learned  doctor,  the  elder,  bishop,  or 
pastor,  of  that  particular  flock.  What  sentiments  might  not 
the  words  of  Scripture  be  made  to  favour,  by  this  loose  and 
arbitrary  m,ode  of  interpreting  ?  It  is  strange  that  one,  whose 
discernment  and  impartiality,  notwithstanding  his  prejudices, 
led  him  to  discover  that,  in  the  sacred  writings,  there  was  no 
distinction  between  bishop  and  presbyter,  was  not  able  to  dis- 
cover (what  was  fvdly  as  evident)  that  they  contained  not  a 
single  vestige  of  metropolitical  primacy.  The  language  of  the 
fathers  of  the  fourth  and  succeeding  centuries,  (for  then  all 
these  degrees  were  firmly  rooted)  concerning  the  offices  of 
Timothy  and  Titus,  and  the  current  maxim,  "  one  church,  one 
bishop,"  which  naturally  sprang  from  the  distinction  of  bishop 
and  presbyter,  had  entirely  warped  this  interpreter's  judgment 
in  every  case  wherein  the  subject  of  the  ministry  was  con- 
cerned, 

I  must  beg  leave  to  add,  that  if  what  this  gentleman  and  I 
are  both  agreed  in,  that  there  was  originally  no  intervening 


124  LECTURES  ON 

order  between  bishop  and  deacon,  be  admitted  to  be  just,  th<* 
account  given  above,  of  the  rise  of  such  an  order,  has,  ab- 
stracting from  its  external  evidence,  the  advantage  of  his  in 
respect  of  internal  probability.  That  a  middle  order  (as  that 
of  presbyter  is  in  the  church  of  England,  and  the  church  of 
Rome)  was,  notwithstandmg  the  silence  of  history,  erected  at 
once  immediately  alter  the  times  of  the  apostles,  is,  to  say  the 
least,  much  more  unlikely,  than  that  it  arose  gradually  out  of 
an  inconsiderable  distinction,  which  had  obtained  from  the 
beginning,  Dodwell's  hypothesis,  that  all  those  ordained  by  the 
apostles  were  no  more  than  presbyters,  in  his  acceptation  of 
the  term,  labours  under  the  like  defect  with  Hammond's.  It 
is  very  remarkable,  that  these  two  strenuous  defenders  of  epis- 
copacy do,  in  effect,  both  renounce  its  apostolical  origin,  ad- 
mitting no  subordination  among  the  ministers  of  the  word  in 
the  churches  planted  by  the  apostles  ;  and  that  they  do  not 
differ  more  widely  from  their  allies  in  this  cause,  than  they  do 
from  one  another.  It  is  a  shrewd  presumption,  that  a  system 
is  ill-founded,  when  its  most  intelligent  friends  are  so  much 
divided  about  it ;  and  in  order  to  account  for  it,  recur  to  hypo- 
theses so  contradictory.  A  presumption  too,  let  me  add,  that 
their  judgment  would  lead  them  soon  to  adopt  the  premises  of 
their  adversaries,  to  which  they  sometimes  approach  very  near, 
if  their  passions  would  allow  them  to  admit  the  conclusion. 

Thus  we  have  advanced  from  the  perfect  equality,  in  re- 
spect of  ministerial  powers,  in  the  stated  pastors  of  the 
churches,  planted  by  the  apostles,  to  that  parochial  episcopacy 
which  immediately  succeeded  it ;  and  which,  though  it  arose 
gradually  from  an  inconsiderable  cause,  seems  to  have  assumed 
the  model  of  a  proper  episcopate,  as  the  word  is  now  under- 
stood, before  the  middle  of  the  second  century.  And  this  I 
consider  as  the  first  step  of  the  hierarchy.  I  shall  continue  t© 
trace  its  progress  in  the  succeeding  lectures  on  this  subject. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  125r 


LECTURE  VIIL 


1  SHOULD  not  have  thought  it  necessarj^  to  be  so  particular 
as  I  have  been,  in  ascertaining  the  nature  of  that  polity  which 
obtained  in  the  primitive  church,  both  in  the  simple  form 
wherein  it  was  first  settled  by  the  apostles,  and  in  that  which 
it  soon  after  assumed,  and  almost  universally  retained,  till  the 
expiration  of  the  third  century,  were  not  this  a  matter,  that  is 
made  a  principal  foundation  of  dissent  by  a  pretty  numerous 
sect  in  this  country.  I  do  not  here  allude  to  those  amongst  us, 
who  barely  prefer  the  episcopal  form  of  government,  whom, 
in  general,  as  far  as  I  have  had  occasion  to  know  them,  I  have 
found  moderate  and  reasQnable  in  their  sentiments  on  this  sub. 
ject.  Such  do  not  pretend  that  the  external  model  of  the 
church  (whatever  they  may  think  of  the  antiquity  of  theirs) 
is  of  the  essence  of  religion.  They  are  sensible,  that  an 
ecclesiastical  polity,  however  necessary,  is  but  a  subsidiary 
establishment,  totally  distinct  from  the  spiritual  and  vital  prin- 
.ciple,  or  the  religion  properly  so  called,  for  whose  preservation 
and  advancement  it  is  calculated  ;  that  the  merits  of  any  form 
can  be  judged  of  only  from  its  fitness  for  answering  the  end  ; 
that  in  this  as  in  all  other  matters  of  experience,  different 
times  and  different  places  may  require  some  differences. 

The  notion  that  it  was  the  intention  of  the  apostles,  that  the 
particular  mould  which  they  gave  the  church  should  be  held 
inviolable,  or  that  it  was  their  doctrine,  that  the  continuance! 
of  the  same  mould  is  essential  to  the  being  of  the  churchy 
appears  to  me  not  indeed  problematical,  but  utterly  incredible. 
One  might  have  justly  expected  in  that  case  (the  matter  being 
of  such  infinite  consequence)  a  fuller  and  clearer  account  not 
only  of  what  they  did  in  this  way,  but  also  of  their  doctriniC 
in  relation  to  its  importance.  I  shall  add  a  few  observations 
for  the  further  support  of  the  general  point  regarding  the  n^e- 
rits  of  the  question. 

As  to  the  origin  of  one  of  the  offices,  that  of  deacon,  it  is 
related  in  such  a  manner  as  bears  all  the  marks  of  a  prudential 
expedient,  suggested  by  a  present  inconvenience.     The  office 


tm  LECTURES  OIsT 

too,  on  its  first  erection,  was  a  trust  in  things  merely  tempo- 
ral ;  or  what  Jerom,  not  unjustly,  though  perhaps  too  con- 
temptuously, called,  the  service  of  tables  and  widows. 
They  were  no  other  than  what,  in  modern  language,  we  should 
call  the  church's  almoners.  Nor  is  it  any  objection  to  this 
representation,  that  we  find  both  Stephen  and  Philip,  who 
were  among  the  seven  deacons,  that  were  first  presented  by 
the  people  to  the  apostles,  exercising  spiritual  functions,  such 
as  preaching  and  baptizing.  This  power  they  certainly  did 
not  derive  from  the  superintendency  of  the  people's  charities, 
to  which  alone  they  were  chosen,  with  which  they  were  in- 
trusted, and  which  the  apostles,  in  the  very  institution  of  the 
ofBce,  expressly  distinguish  from  the  ministry  of  the  word. 
"  It  is  not  reason,"  said  they,  when  harassed  by  the  murmurs 
of  the  Hellenists  against  the  Hebrews,  on  account  of  the  sup- 
posed neglect  of  their  widows,  "  that  we  should  leave  the 
*••  word  of  God,  and  serve  tables.  Wherefore,  brethren,  look 
*'  ye  out  among  you  seven  men  of  honest  report,  full  of  the 
*'  Holy  Ghost  and  wisdom,  whom  we  may  appoint  over  this 
"  business.  But  we  will  give  ourselves  continually  to  prayer, 
*'  and  to  the  ministry  of  the  word."  Here  the  hxxoma  rpcfa-e- 
^tn-.  and  the  oiouicvtcc  A«y»i  are  manifestly  contrasted  to  each 
other>  Stephen  and  Philip,  on  the  contrary,  derived  their 
spiritual  functions,  either  from  that  title  with  which,  accord- 
ing to  TertuUian  and  the  deacon  Hilarius,  every  qualified  per- 
son, in  that  state  of  the  church,  was  invested  for  promoting  the 
common  cause,  or  from  the  supernatural  gifts  they  had  re- 
ceived for  the  advancement  of  the  faith,  before  their  election 
to  the  deaconry,  or  (as  some  have  thought  most  probable)  from 
their  being  called  of  God  to  the  office  of  evangelists.  Philip 
is,  in  another  place,  but  at  a  later  period,  expressly  called  an 
evangelist.  Acts  xxi,  8.  It  is  worthy  of  notice,  that  his  office 
of  deacon  is  there  also  named,  that  v/e  may  not  confound 
them,  or  ascribe  to  the  one  what  belonged  to  the  other.  We 
entered  into  the  house  of  Philip  the  evangelist,  who  was  one 
of  the  seven.  Though  it  might  be  unsuitable,  when  the  num- 
ber of  believers  was  greatly  increased,  to  an  office  of  so  much 
weight  as  the  apostleship,  to  be  encumbered  with  a  charge  of 
this  nature,  it  might  not  be  incompatible  with  any  office  (like 
that  of  evangelist)  of  less  importance.  But  soon  after  the 
apostolick  age,  (or  perhaps  sooner)  though,  by  the  way,  we 
have  no  direct  information  concerning  it,  the  deacons  were  ad- 
mitted to  assist  in  the  inferiour  parts  of  the  sacred  service.  At 
present,  indeed,  in  almost  all  the  churches  where  the  three 
orders  of  bishop,  presbyter,  and  deacon,  are  found,  the  last 
mentioned  has  no  sort  of  charge  in  that  particular  which  at 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  12r 

first  was  his  whole  charge,  and  which  alone  gave  occasion  for 
the  institution  of  the  office  ;  insomuch  that  we  cannot  say  that 
the  modern  deacon  is  in  any  respect  the  same  with  the  aposto- 
lick  deacon,  unless  it  be  in  the  name.  Properly  the  original 
charge  of  the  institution,  of  which  we  are  informed  Acts  vi, 
1,  is  abolished,  though  the  name  be  retained,  and  applied  to 
an  office  totally  distinct.  At  present  the  oversight  of  the  poor 
belongs,  in  England,  to  the  church-wardens,  who  are  annually 
elected  in  each  parish  by  vhe  vestry.  The  deacons  have  no 
concern  in  it.     In  other  churches,  other  methods  are  adopted. 

There  was  another  office  also  in  the  primitive  church  fronj. 
the  times  of  the  apostles,  which  was  conferred  on  elderly  wo- 
men, commonly  widows,  that  of  deaconess.  Like  the  former^ 
it  did  not  belong  to  the  ministry  of  the  word,  but  to  that  of 
tables,  and  seems  to  have  been  devised  for  the  discharge  of 
certain  charitable  services  to  strangers  and  to  the  female  poor, 
which  could  not  be  so  properly  performed  by  the  deacons. 
That  it  was  of  apostolick  institution,  though  we  be  not  inform- 
ed of  the  occasion  and  manner,  there  is  no  ground  to  doubt, 
since  mention  is  made  of  it  in  the  New  Testament.  Phebc 
is  denominated  by  Paul,  Rom.  xvi,  1,  "  a  deaconess,  ae-ca 
*'  hctKovov,  of  the  church  in  Cenchrea."  And  the  directions 
given  in  the  fifth  chapter  of  the  first  epistle  to  Timothy  have 
always  been  considered,  and  with  great  appearance  of  reason, 
as  regarding  those  women  who  were  proper  to  be  admitted  to 
this  function.  Yet  this  is  an  office  which  has  now,  for  many 
centuries,  been  universally  disused. 

What  is  truly  of  divine  right  in  this  whole  matter  of  polity 
is,  in  my  judgment,  plainly  this,  that  those  important  and  di- 
vine lessons,  which  have  been  transmitted  to  us  by  the  pastors 
who  pi'eceded  us,  should  by  us  be  committed  to  faithful  men, 
who  shall  be  able  to  teach  others  also  ;  and  that  as  much  as 
possible  every  thing  should  be  done  for  the  advancement  of  the 
knowledge,  the  faith,  and  the  obedience  of  the  Gospel.  This 
is,  doubtless,  a  duty  incumbent  on  the  church  and  her  gover- 
nours  to  the  end  of  the  world. 

But  though  it  be  admitted,  that  a  ministry  is  essential  to  the 
church,  there  are  many  things  regarding  the  form  of  the  mi- 
nistry which  must  be  accounted  circumstantial.  For  my  own 
part,  I  acknowledge  it  to  be  my  opinion,  that  there  is  not  a 
church  now  in  the  world  which  is  on  the  model  of  that  form- 
ed by  the  apostles.  The  circumstances  of  men  and  things  are 
perpetually  varying  in  respect  of  laws,  civil  polity,  customs, 
manners  ;  these,  m  every  society,  give  rise  to  new  regula- 
tions, arrangeiTients,  ceremonies  :  these,  again,  insensibly  in- 
troduce changes  in  the  relations  of  different  classes  and  ranks 


128  LECTURES  ON 

of  men  one  to  another,  exalting  some,  and  depressing  others* 
Sometimes  alterations  arise  from  a  sort  of  necessity.  A  par- 
ticular measure  may  be  expedient  at  one  time  and  in  certain 
circumstances,  which  is  inexpedient  at  another  time  and  in 
different  circumstances.  But  it  is  equally  certain  on  the  other 
hand,  that  changes  do  not  always  spring  from  prudential  con- 
siderations of  fitness.  As  little  can  we  say  that  they  are  always 
for  the  better.  They  more  frequently  result  from  the  unbrid- 
led passions  of  men,  favoured  by  circumstances  and  oppor- 
tunity. 

From  what  hath  been  said  above,  therefore,  let  it  not  be 
imagined,  that  I  consider  the  outward  form  of  polity,  because 
not  of  the  essentials  of  religion,  as  a  matter  absolutely  indif- 
ferent. That,  I  imagine,  would  be  an  errour  in  the  other 
extreme.  To  recur  to  an  illustration  I  formerly  employed, 
though  the  house  in  which  a  man  lodges  make  no  part  of  .his 
person,  either  of  his  body  or  of  his  soul,  one  house  may  prove 
a  very  comfortable  and  convenient  lodging,  and  another  so  in- 
commodious as  to  be  scarcely  habitable.  Under  whatever 
form  of  ecclesiastick  polity  a  man  lives,  it  will  still  hold  an 
infallible  truth,  that  if  he  believe  and  obey  the  Gospel  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  he  shall  be  saved.  But  certain  it  is,  that 
one  model  of  church  government  may  be  much  better  calcu- 
lated for  promoting  that  belief  and  obedience  than  another. 
Nay,  it  is  not  impossible  that  such  changes  may  be  introduced, 
as  are  much  more  fitted  for  obstructing  the  influence  of  true 
religion  than  for  advancing  it ;  nay,  for  inspiring  a  contrary 
temper,  and  nourishing  the  most  dangerous  vices.  How  far 
this  proved  the  case  with  the  christian  community  is  submit- 
ted to  every  judicious  student  of  ecclesiastick  history. 

1  now  proceed  in  the  brief  detail  of  changes  which  ensued. 
In  my  last  discourse  on  this  subject,  I  brought  the  history  of 
the  ecclesiastick  polity  as  far  down  as  the  end  of  the  third  cen- 
tury. I  observed,  that  the  government  which  then  very  ge- 
nerally prevailed,  might  justly  be  denominated  a  parochial 
episcopacy.  The  bishop,  who  was  properly  the  pastor,  had 
the  charge  of  no  more  than  one  parish,  one  church  or  con- 
gregation, the  parishioners  all  assembling  in  the  same  place 
with  him  for  the  purposes  of  publick  worship,  religious  in- 
struction, and  the  solemn  commemoration  of  the  death  of 
Christ ;  that  in  all  these  the  bishop  commonly  presided  ;  that 
each  congregation  almost  universally  had  also  a  college  of 
presbyters,  who  were  more  or  less  in  number,  as  the  exigen- 
cies of  the  parish  required  ;  that  these  constituted  the  bishop's 
council  in  judicial  and  deliberative  matters,  and  his  assist- 
ants in  the  performance  of  religious  functions,  both  in  publick 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  ik 

atid  in  private.  And  when  the  bishop  was  detained  by  sick- 
ness, or  was  otherwise  necessarily  absent,  they  supplied  his 
place.  He  was  also  attended  by  those  called  deacons,  who, 
beside  the  care  of  the  publick  charities,  assisted  in  some  of 
the  inferiour  oiBces  of  religion,  as  in  distributing  the  sacra- 
mental elements  in  the  eucharist,  in  making  the  preparations 
necessary  for  baptism,  and  other  the  like  services.  Socie- 
times  these  also  were  specially  empowered  by  the  bishop  to 
baptize,  and  even  to  preach.  The  pastor,  with  his  colleagues 
the  presbyters,  (for  so  Cyprian  frequently  denominates  them) 
and  the  deacons,  constituted  the  presbytety,  with  the  assist- 
ance of  which,  but  not  intirel)^  without  thre  people,  in  matters 
of  principal  concernment,  he  conducted  the  affairs  of  his 
church. 

Fra  Paolo  Sarpi,  of  whom  I  gave  you  a  character  in  a  for- 
mer lecture,  speaking  of  the  ancient  government  of  the 
churches,  affirms,  after  Jerom,  that  in  the  beginning  they 
constituted  so  tnany  aristocracies,  governed  by  the  council  of 
their  respective  presbyteries,  anriong  the  members  whereof 
there  subsisted  a  perfect  parity  ;  that  afterwards,  in  order  the 
more  effectually  to  obviate  the  divisions  which  sprang  up,  the 
monarchical  form  came  to  be  adopted.  The  superintendency 
of  the  whole  was  given  to  the  president  or  bishop,  to  whom 
all  the  orders  of  the  church  were  bound  to  submit.  It  is  to 
be  observed,  that  he  speaks  not  of  the  church  universal,  but 
of  individual  churches  or  congregations.  As  to  the  govern- 
ment of  the  whole  christian  commonwealth,  I  shall  have  oc- 
casion to  consider  it  afterwards.  But  even  in  the  original 
form  of  government  in  single  parishes,  it  was  not^  as  Sarpi 
seems  to  signify,  a  pure  aristocracy,  but  rather  a  mixture  of 
the  two  forms,  the  aristocratical  and  the  democratical ;  for  in 
some  matters  at  least,  as  I  observed  before,  nothing  was  done 
withovU  the  consent  of  the  people,  not  declared  by  represen- 
tatives, but  by  themselves,  assembled  in  a  collective  body. 
And  even  when  afterwards  it  came  to  assume  more  of  the 
monarchical  form,  it  was  not,  at  least  till  after  the  middle  of 
the  third  century,  as  we  learn  from  Cyprian's  letters,  an  un- 
mixed monarchy,  but  a  monarchy  limited,  and  checked  by  the 
mixture  it  still  retained  of  the  two  other  sorts  of  government, 
the  one  in  the  presbytery,  the  other  in  the  congregation.  Hith- 
erto, however,  it  held,  with  but  a  few  exceptions,  towards  the 
end' of  the  aforesaid  period,  that  to  one  bishop  there  was  only 
,one  parish,  one  chUrch,  one  altar  or  communion-tAble,  (for 
both  names  were  used)  one  baptistery,  and  though  there  were 
several  presbyters,  the  parish  was  undivided,  each  of  then^ 

K 


13©  LECTURES  ON 

belonged  equally  to  the  whole,  and  was,  in  the  discharge  of 
his  functions,  at  the  direction  of  the  bishop. 

The  first  thing  that  next  deserves  our  notice,  is  to  inquire 
from  what  causes  it  proceeded,  that  one  bishop  came  to  have 
the  oversight  of  many  congregations,  and  that  the  several 
presbyters  came  to  have  their  several  parishes,  every  congre- 
gation having  its  own  church,  altar,  and  baptistery,  as  well  as 
pastor  or  presbyter,  to  whose  care  the  smaller  parish,  or  sub- 
division of  the  larger  one,  was  peculiarly  allotted,  they  all 
continuing  still  in  subordination  to  the  bishop,  who  was  ac- 
knowledged their  common  head. 

We  have  seen  already,  that  in  the  first  planting  of  churches* 
(however  wonderful  the  progress  which  the  apostles  made 
may  jusdy  be  accounted)  as  the  disciples  bore  but  a  small  pro- 
portion compared  with  the  unconverted  Jews  and  Heathens, 
the  tract  of  country,  that  would  be  necessary  to  yield  but  a 
middling  congregation,  must  have  been  of  pretty  large  extent. 
The  extent  for  some  time  would  occasionally  be  enlarged,  by 
the  accession  of  new  converts  in  neighbouring  places,  where 
there  were  none  before.  This  would  frequently  cause  an  in- 
crease not  only  to  the  number  of  people  in  the  congregation, 
but  also  to  the  territory  of  the  parish.  As  additions  were 
made  gradually  to  this  profession  by  the  diffusion  of  christian 
knowledge  to  places  it  had  not  reached  before,  the  method 
which  would  naturally  occur  would  be,  to  annex  the  converts, 
where  they  were  but  few,  to  the  parish  that  lay  nearest.  It 
would  be  only  when  considerable  acquisitions  were  made  all 
at  once  to  the  christian  cause  in  remoter  places,  where  for- 
merly there  had  been  few  or  none,  that  the  notion  of  new  erec- 
tions would  suggest  itself.  And  that  in  the  purest  and  sim- 
plest times,  (before  vanity  or  avarice  had  insinuated  them- 
selves) recourse  was  had  to  this  method  of  erecting  new  pa- 
rishes, the  x'^psTTiTy^TToi^  country  bishops,  mentioned  by  eccle- 
siastick  writers,  is  an  undoubted  evidence.  But  what  would 
make  people  in  most  cases  recur  rather  to  the  other  method, 
is  the  consideration  of  the  plurality  of  presbyters  they  had  in 
every  church.  As  in  this  they  were  not  confined  to  a  set  num- 
ber, but  had  more  or  fewer,  as  the  exigencies  of  the  parish 
required,  they  would,  when  the  charge  grew  greater,  think  it 
necessary  to  add  to  the  number  of  the  presbyters,  in  order  to 
prevent  its  becoming  burdensome. 

Further ;  it  is  no  reflection  on  the  church  in  general,  or 
even  on  the  pastors  in  particular,  to  suppose,  that  however 
sincere  their  zeal  for  the  cause  of  Christ  might  be,  as  it  un- 
doubtedly was  with  a  very  great  majority,  they  would  not  be 
intirely  siiperiour  to  considerations  either  of  interest  or  of 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  131 

ambition,  when  such  considerations  were  not  opposed  by  mo- 
tives of  a  higher  nature.  Now  as  the  pastors  were  supported 
by  the  voluntary  contributions  of  the  people,  of  which  the 
bishop  had  a  fixed  proportion,  the  number  and  wealth  of  his 
people,  and  the  extent  of  his  parish,  added  both  to  his  import- 
ance and  to  his  interest.  Indeed,  it  would  be  impossible 
otherwise  to  account  for  it,  that  because  in  a  large  city,  when 
only  one  congregation  of  christians  could  be  collected,  they 
had  but  one  bishop,  they  should  continue  to  have  but  one^ 
when  there  were  more  christians  in  it  than  would  be  sufficient 
to  constitute  forty,  fifty,  or  a  hundred  congregations.  This, 
at  the  same  time,  strongly  shows  the  influence  of  names  and 
titles  on  mankind.  The  chief  pastor  had  been  distinguished, 
as  was  observed,  from  about  the  middle  of  the  second  century, 
by  the  title  of  bishop  of  such  a  city  or  town,  suppose  Rome, 
Alexandria,  or  Antioch,  when  he  had  only  one  congregation, 
and  that  perhaps  a  little  one.  But  this  congregation  was  col- 
lected not  only  from  all  parts  of  the  city,  but  from  the  suburbs, 
and,  probably,  some  of  the  nearest,  villages.  This  suggested 
the  notion,  that  however  much  the  number  of  the  disciples 
might  be  increased,  it  would  be  unsuitable  to  his  title,  dero- 
gatory from  his  dignity,  as  well  as  hurtful  to  his  interest,  to 
cut  off  any  part  of  the  city,  or  suburbs,  or  suburban  territory, 
which  had  always  been  considered  as  under  his  inspection  be- 
fore, and  to  which  he  seemed  to  have  acquired  a  right  by  pre- 
scription. It  would  have  looked  like  a  sort  of  degradation  to 
make  him  exchange  the  title  of  bishop  of  Rome,  or  Alexan- 
dria, into  bishop  of  such  a  street  or  lane. 

It  is  indeed  certain,  that  a  pastor's  charge  is  properly  the 
people,  not  the  place.  It  is  accordingly  styled  cura  anitnariim^ 
the  cure  of  souls.  Nevertheless,  there  are  several  rea- 
sons, which  contribute  to  make  the  territorial  boundaries  have 
more  influence  on  the  imagination  in  the  notions  of  right,  than 
the  number  of  the  people  has.  In  the  first  place,  the  former  are 
more  easily  ascertained  than  the  latter.  Those  are  permanent, 
these  are  perpetually  changing.  The  people  are  denominated 
from  the  place,  not  the  place  from  the  people.  Whatever 
revolutions  come,  the  inhabitants  of  Rome  will  always  be  Ro- 
mans,of  Carthage,  Carthaginians,  and  of  Alexandria,  Alexan- 
drians. Add  to  this,  that  the  restriction  of  a  pastoral  charge 
to  a  part  of  the  former  local  precinct,  would  have  withdrawn 
many  people  from  that  bishop,  under  whose  cai'e  they  had 
been,  perhaps,  the  greater  part  of  their  lives.  This  would 
have  had  the  appearance  of  an  injury  both  to  him  and  them 
too,  if  they  esteemed  him.  But  nobody  could  be  considered 
as  injured  by  the  addition  of  numbers,  who  had  no  pastor  at  all 


132  LECTURES  ON 

before.  That  it  is  not  a  mere  hypothesis,  that  sentinaeints  o£ 
dignity  and  rank  contributed  to  prevent  a  new  partiion,  bet- 
ter suited  to  the  circumstances  that  ensued,  oi  discri..ts  vvhii;h, 
with  great  propriety,  had  been  called  parishes,  when  each  con- 
tained no  more  christians  than  were  sufficient  to  compose  a 
single  congregation  j  appears  from  this,  thai,  in  the  canons  after- 
wards established,  it  is  assigned  as  a  reason  for  the  suppres- 
sion of  the  ^apsTrta-Mvoi-.  and  for  not  ordaining,  in  tin. e  to  come^ 
bishops  in  villages  and  little  towns,  lest  the  v-piscopai  name  and 
aiithority  should  be  brought  into  contempt.  Such  canons, 
however,  were  not  always  observed.  Augustine,  i)ishop  of 
Hippo,  more  regardful  of  his  master's  service,  than  ot  any 
honours  or  profits  he  might  derive  from  the  ext^.  nt  of  his 
charge,  erected  a  bishoprick  at  Fussala,  a  villitge  in  his  dio- 
cess,  as  the  bishop's  charge  came  then  to  be  denouiinated. 

But  to  return  to  the  first  subdivision  of  the  pastoral  charge, 
into  smaller  precincts,  since  calji^d  parishes,  the  name  which 
had  formerly  belonged  to  the  whole,  there  can  be  no  doubt, 
that  theVe  had  been  instances  of  it  in  great  cities  long  before 
the  expiration  of  the  third  century;  in  some,  perhaps,  as  Rome, 
Alexandria,  Antioch,  even  before  the  expiration  of  the  se- 
cond ;  though  it  was  far  from  being  general  till  a  considerable 
time  after  the  third.  Churches,  or  oratories  for  the  accom- 
modation of  the  people,  now  that  these  were  too  numerous  to 
assemble  as  formerly  in  one  place,  began  to  be  built,  at  first  only 
in  the  remoter  parts  of  the  parish.  They  were  then  no  more 
than  what  we  call  chapels  of  ease,  and  scarcely  so  much.  They 
had  not  yet  fixed  presbyters  of  their  own,  but  got  occasionally 
sometimes  one,  sometimes  another  sent  them,  from  the  mother 
church,  which  was  the  parish  church,  to  preside  in  the  religious 
service,  among  those  who  assembled  in  these  chapels,  or  con- 
venticles, as  they  were  also  called,  for  it  was  not  a  name  of  re- 
proach then.  Still,  however,  the  idea  so  much  prevailed,  that 
where  there  was  but  one  bishop,  there  was  properly  but  one 
congregation,  and  ought  to  be  but  one  altar,  that  as  far  down 
as  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century,  pope  Innocent  the  first,  as 
appears  from  his  epistles,  wherein  he  m_entions  his  sending  the 
eucharisticai  bread  to  the  presbyters  ofil'^iating  in  those  subor- 
dinate churches,  assigns  this  for  his  reason,  that  they  might  not, 
on  such  occasions,  consider  themselves  as  separated  from  his 
communion.  It  had  been  chiefiv  in  the  century  immedi;!tely 
precetiing,  when  the  christian  religion  was  legally  established 
as  the  religion  of  the  empire,  and  when,  through  the  concur- 
ref  t  of  secular  with  spiritual  motives,  there  came  to  be  an 
ia'^^mense  accession  of  people  to  the  church,  that  there  was  a 
necessity  for  building  so  great  a  number  of  chapels,  or  -tituli^ 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  133 

as,  in  the  Latin  churches,  they  were,  for  diistinction's  sake,  at ' 
first  denominated.     And  hence  the  English  phrase  to  have  a 
title^   when  used  of  one  who  has  obtained  a  presentation  to  a 
parish. 

but  as  changes  must  be  gradual  not  to  shock  those  senti- 
ments to  which  men  have  been  long  habituated,  they  could  not, 
at  first,  have  any  notion  of  the  propriety  of  settling,  in  these 
chapels,  presbyters  to  officiate  constantly,  at  their  appointed 
times  of  meeting.  This  could  not  fail  to  look  too  much  like 
what  they  had  been  always  taught  to  consider  as  the  principal 
outward  badge  of  schism,  cutting  off  a  part  from  the  rest  of 
the  congregation,  separating,  as  it  were,  the  members  from  the 
head,  assigning  them,  pastors  different  from  the  bishop,  presby- 
ters, who,  when  allotted  to  particular  charges,  could  not 
remain  in  the  same  immediate  dependance  on  the  bishop  as 
formerly,  or  in  the  like  intimate  connexion  with  the  pres- 
bytery. 

Gradually,  however,  the  sense  of  obvious  convenience  wore 
off  their  prejudices  ;  and,  first  in  the  suburban  villages  at  the 
greatest  distance,  a  single  presbyter  was  assigned  to  every  cha- 
pel as  their  minister.  The  chapels  in  the  city  long  continued 
to  be  supplied  occasionally  from  the  mother  church,  or  bishop's 
church,  according  to  any  arrangement  he  thought  proper  to 
adopt.  Hence  arose  a  distinction  between  city  presbyters  and 
country  presbyters.  The  former  were,  more  properly,  of  the 
bishop's  council,  and  the  latter,  as  having  their  fixed  charges 
in  the  country,  were  not  entitled  to  officiate  in  the  city,  unless 
by  special  desire.  At  length  the  custom  crept  into  the  cities 
also,  from  the  sense  of  its  manifest  conveniency.  Alexandria, 
by  Epiphanius's  account,  with  which  Sozomen's  agrees,  was 
the  first  wherein  every  church  or  chapel  had  its  own  ministers 
or  chaplains,  one  presbyter,  and  one  or  more  deacons,  as  its 
extent  and  necessities  seemed  to  require.  In  Rome,  the  prac- 
tice, though  not  so  early,  appears  to  have  been,  to  give  two 
presbyters  to  every  chapel  or  titulus.  It  were  easy,  if  neces- 
sary, to  give  a  still  stronger  confirmation  of  this  account, 
from  the  vestiges  that  yet  remain  of  christian  antiquities  in 
most  countries  of  Europe.  I  shall  only  instance  in  England, 
and,  for  this  purpose,  adduce  some  quotations  from  Burn's 
Ecclesiastical  Law,  a  book  universally  and  justly  held  a  stand- 
ard on  the  subject  whereof  it  treats,  and  in  which  the  author 
has  been  careful  to  support,  by  the  best  authorities,  whatever 
he  advances.  On  the  article  cathedral^  he  affirms,  "•  The  ca- 
"  thedral  church  is  the  parish  church  of  the  whole  du/cess, 
*' (which  diocess  was  therefore  commonly  called  j&«r.o<77i(r/  in 
*'  ancient  times,  till  the  application  of  this  name  to  the  lesser 


13'^  LECTURES  ON 

•^"^  "branches  into  which  it  was  divided,  made  it,  for  distinction's 
''sake,  to  be  called  only  by  the  name  of  diocess  :J  and  it  hath 
*^  been  affirmed,  with  great  probability,  that  if  one  resort  to  the 
**  cathedral  church  to  hear  divine  service,  it  is  a  resorting  to 
*'  the  parish  church,  within  the  natural  sense  and  meaning  of 
*'  the  statute."    Again,  on  the  word  appropriation^  he  has  these 
remarks: — ''  For  the  first  six  or  seven  centuries,  iht  parochia^-. 
**  was  the  diocess,  or  episcopal  district,  wherein  the  bishop  and 
**'  his  clergy  lived  together  at  the  cathedral  church  ;  and  what- 
"  ever  were  the  tithes  and  oblations  of  the  faithful,  they  were 
'^  all  brought  into  a  common   fund,  from  whence  a  continual 
*^  supply  was  had  for  support  of  the  bishop,  and  his  college  of 
*•■  presbyters  and  deacons,  and  for  the  repair  and  ornaments  of 
*^  the  church,  and  for  other  suitable  works  of  piety  and  charity. 
*'  So  that  before  the  distribution  of  England  into  parishes,  (as 
*'^  the  word  is  now  used)  all  tithes,  offerings,  and  ecclesiastical 
"  profits  whatsoever,  did  entirely  belong  to  the  bishop  and  his 
*'  clergy  for  pious  uses.     This  commvmity  and  collegiate  life 
**  of  the  bishop  and  his  clergy,  appears  to  have  been  the  prac- 
**  tice  of  our  British,  and  was  again  appointed  for  the  model  of 
"  our  Saxon  churches.     While  the  bishops  thus  lived  amongst 
**  their  clergy,  residing  with  them  in  their  proper  seats,  orca-i 
"  thedral  churches,  the  stated  services,  or  publick  offices  of  reli-> 
"  gion,  were  performed  only  in  those  single  choirs,   to  which?- 
**■  the  people  of  each  whole  diocess  resorted,   especially  at  the 
*'  more  solemn  times  and  seasons  of  devotion.     But  to  supply 
"  the  inconveniences  of  distant  and  difficult  access,  the  bishops 
''^  sent  out  some  presbyters  into  the  remoter  parts  to  be  itine^-; 
*'  rant  preachers,  or  occasional  dispensers  of  the  word  and  safe; 
*'  craments.     Most  of  these  missionaries  returned  from  their 
«■'  holy  circuit  to  the  centre  of  unity,  the  episcopal  college,  and 
'*'  bad  there  only  their  fixed  abode,  giving  the  bishop  a  due  ac- 
*'  count  of  their  labours  and  successes  in  their  respective  pro- 
"  gress.     Yet  some  few  of  the  travelling  clergy,  where  they 
"  saw  a  place  more  populous,  and  a  people  zealous,  built  there. 
''  a  plain  and  humble  conveniency  for  divine  worship,  and  pro- 
*'  cured  the  bishop  to  consecrate   it  for  an  oratory^  or  chapel. 
4'  at  large,  not  yet  for  a  parish  church,  or  any  particular  con-^i 
*'  gregation,  to  be  confined  within  certain  bounds  and  limits*;. 
^'  And  while  the  necessities  of  the  country  were  thus   upon' 
''  occasion  supplied,  it  did  not  alter  the  state  of  ecclesiastical 
*'  patrimony,  which  still  remained  invested  in  the  bishop,  for.' 
^'  the   common   uses  of  religion.     The  division  of  a  dioces^Hi 
'"'■  into  rural  parishes,  and  the  foundation  of  churches  adequate 
"  to  them,  cannot  be  ascribed  to  any  one  act,  nor  indeed  to  any^ 
".one  single  age.     Several  causes  and  persons  did. contribute 


ECCLESIASTICAL  tllSTORY.  135 

**  to  the  rise  of  the  parochial  churches."  Then  follows  an 
enumeration  of  the  principal  causes.  Once  more  on  the  word 
parish  : — ''  At  first  there  were  no  parochial  divisions  of  cures 
"  here  in  England,  as  there  are  now.  For  the  bishops  and 
"  their  clergy  lived  in  common  ;  and  before  that  the  numbef  of 
"  christians  was  much  increased,  the  bishops  sent  out  their 
"  clergy  to  preach  to  the  people  as  they  saw  occasion.  But 
"  after  the  inhabitants  had  generally  embraced  Christianity, 
"  this  itinerant  and  occasional  going  from  place  to  place  was 
"found  very  inconvenient,  because  of  the  constant  offices  that 
*'  were  to  be  administered,  and  the  people  not  knowing  to 
"  whom  they  should  resort  for  spiritual  offices  and  directions. 
*'  Hereupon  the  bounds  of  parochial  cures  were  found  neces- 
"  sary  to  be  settled  here  by  those  bishops,  who  were  the  great 
"  instruments  of  converting  the  nation  from  the  Saxon  idola- 
*'"  try.  At  first  they  made  use  of  any  old  British  churches, 
*'  that  were  left  standing,  and  afterwards,  from  time  to  time, 
*'  in  successive  ages,  churches  were  built  and  endowed  by 
**  lords  of  manors  and  others,  for  the  use  of  the  inhabitants  of 
*'  their  several  manors  or  districts,  and,  consequently,  paro- 
*'  chial  bounds  affixed  thereunto.  And  it  was  this  which  gave  . 
"  a  primary  title  to  the  patronage  of  laymen  ;  and  which  also, 
*'  oftentimes,  made  the  bounds  of  a  parish  commensurate  to 
"  the  extent  of  a  manor."  I  have  been  the  fuller  in  these 
quotations,  as  I  thought  it  of  consequence  to  produce  the  senti- 
ments  of  a  learned  divine  of  the  church  of  England,  who  is^ 
besides,  a  celebrated  jurist  and  christian  antiquary,  that  it 
might  be  evi-dent  to  every  impartial  inquirer,  that  the  account 
I  have  given  is  not  the  misrepresentation  of  a  party,  but  strict- 
ly conformable  to  the  judgment  of  the  most  candid  and  best 
informed  of  opposite  parties.  I  return  to  the  general  state  of 
things  in  the  empire,  on  the  establishment  of  the  christian  re- 
ligion by  Constantine. 

When  almost  the  whole  people  were  proselyted  to  Christi- 
anity, those  chapels  were  so  greatly  multiplied,  that  it  was  no 
longer  possible  to  supply  them  ail  with  the  eucharist  from  the' 
bishop's  altar  or  communion-table.  Then  it  was  judged  expe- 
dient tp  permit  the  erecting  of  other  altars  in  those  inferiour 
churches,  wherein  the  presbyters  settled  as  pastors  in  the  sub- 
divisions, or  smaller  districts  severally  assigned  to  them, 
should  officiate  in  consecrating  the  sacramental  elements,  and 
distributing  them  to  the  people.  Each  presbyter  came  to  have 
a  peculiar  tie  to  the  discharge  of  all  pastoral  duties  to  those 
allotted  to  him,  such  as  baptizing,  visiting  the  sick,  instructing 
the  catechumens,  admonishing  the  irregular,  publick  and  private 
teaching,  and  giving  testimonials  to  stich  as  removed.     In 


136  LECTURES  ON 

these,  on  account  of  the  vast  multiplicity  which  the  change  of 
circumstances  had  occasioned,  it  was  impossible  now,  as  for- 
merly, that  the  bishop  should  be  always  consulted,  or  that  the 
presbyters  should  always  act  by  immediate  direction.  Every 
presbyter  came  to  be  considered  as  the  pastor  of  the  charge 
committed  to  him,  and  in  every  material  respect  as  the  same 
to  his  part  of  the  parish,  which  the  bishop  had  been  to  the 
whole.  His  charge  itself  came  to  be  denominated  jrotpoiKix.  a 
parish,  a  name  which,  as  I  remarked  before,  had  oeen  uni- 
formly given  to  the  whole  bishoprick,  whereof  this  was  but  a 
portion,  and  the  latter  began  to  be  distinguisht:'d  by  the  name 
haiicria-tq.  diocess,  though  the  distinction  was  not  regularly  ob- 
served till  long  afterwards.  The  names  xv^ixxev  and  ecc/esia 
came  to  be  given  universally  to  those  meeting-houses  as  to 
proper  parish-churches,  and  then  the  inother-church  got  the 
name  cathedral,  as  there  the  throne  of  the  bishop  and  the 
bench  of  the  presbytery  were  erected. 

By  the  account  given  above,  one  would  imagine,  that  in 
some  things  the  power  of  the  bishop  was  nov/  impaired, 
though  the  number  of  his  spiritual  subjects  was  greatly  mul- 
tiplied. The  presbyters  had  more  authority  in  their  respective 
flocks,  and  were  not  under  the  necessity,  as  formerly,  of  re- 
curring always  to  his  warrant  or  permission.  When  the  charge 
became  so  extensive,  and  consequently  burdensome,  the  bi- 
shops were  obliged  to  sacrifice  some  of  their  prerogatives  to 
the  love  of  ease.  But  this  sacrifice  had,  in  effect,  more  the 
appearance  of  abridging  their  power  than  the  reality.  The 
change,  upon  the  whole,  tended  much,  in  the  eye  of  the  world, 
to  aggrandize  the  order.  From  being  the  pastor  of  a  parti- 
eular  flock,  he  was  become  the  superintendant  of  mam  pas- 
tors. Whereas  formerly  he  had  the  charge  of  one  parish  and 
one  congregation,  for  these  terms  are  cori'elates,  he  had  now 
the  charge  of,  perhaps,  fifty  parishes  and  fifty  congregations, 
comprised  within  the  same  compass.  He  was  not  so  closely 
connected  with  the  people  as  before,  but  that  was  solelv  be- 
cause he  was  raised  higher  above  them,  his  immediate  connex- 
ion being  with  their  pastors.  Besides,  in  respect  of  wealth, 
he  drew  great  advantages  from  the  increase  of  numbers, 
being  entitled  to  the  same  proportion  from  the  publick  contri-. 
butions  of  the  whole  diocess.  Not  to  mention  that  the  super- 
stition, or  mistaken  piety  of  some  wealthy  converts,  also  con- 
tributed to  the  increase  of  his  opulence.  And  if,  in  rtgard  to 
most  official  duties,  the  presbyters  did  more  of  themselves  in 
their  several  charges,  they  were  totally  excluded  by  canons 
from  confirming  and  ordaining,  which  sufliciently  secured 
their  depeudance  and  inferiority. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  137 

Add  to  this,  that  the  separation  of  the  presbyters  fronq  one 
another,  by  their  being  obliged  to  reside  in  their  several  pa- 
rishes, and  their  having  opportunity  only  when  called  for  a 
particular  purpose  to  come  together,  assisted  the  bishop  in 
engrossing  the  jurisdiction  in  spiritual  matters,  which  formerly 
belonged  to  the  presbytery,  or  bodj'  of  the  pastors.  And  as 
in  things  temporal  (which  I  showed  in  a  former  discourse) 
the  judicial  power  had,  before  now,  come  entirely  into  his 
hands,  the  immense  accession  of  people  to  his  jurisdiction 
added  immensely  to  his  importance.  And  if  the  aristocrati- 
cal  part  of  church  gorernment  was  greatly  diminished,  the 
democratical  was  totally  subverted.  The  impossibility  ther? 
was,  that  business  should  be  managed  by  the  people  of  a  dio 
cess  collectively,  when  they  amounted,  as  in  several  bishopricks 
to  some  htmdred  thousands,  put  an  end,  in  matters  of  disci- 
pline, to  their  pretensions.  The  only  vestige  that  remained 
of  their  former  rights  was,  that  in  several  places  they  conti- 
nued to  assemble  tumultuously  at  the  election  of  a  bishop. 
But  as  this  affair  was  generally  conducted  with  riot  and  cla- 
mour, and  sometimes  ended  in  blood,  the  principles  of  sound 
policy  required,  that  a  practice  so  fruitful  of  bad  consequences, 
and  so  barren  of  good,  should  be  abolished.  It  was  not  now, 
as  formerly,  a  single  congregation  choosing  their  own  pastor, 
who  was  to  ha\e  the  immediate  charge  of  their  spiritual  in-» 
struction  and  guidance,  but  it  was  a  mob,  often  a  most  out- 
rageous one,  collected  from  a  whole  diocess  or  province,  tp 
nominate  a  great  man,  better  known  by  his  extensive  jurisdic- 
tion and  splendid  titles,  than  by  any  pastoral  duties  he  had  to 
exercise. 

The  train  in  which  things  were  now  put,  gave  rise  to  a  new 
application  of  the  word  nutXvjo-ioc.  I  observed  that  this  term 
had  before  been  always  used  to  denote  either  a  single  congre- 
gation, or  the  whole  christian  community.  When  the  bishop^s 
charge  was  no  more  than  a  single  congregation,  it  was  very 
proper  to  denominate  it  by  that  name,  and  call  it  a  church  in 
the  singular  number.  Now  that  the  term  had,  for  ages,  been 
employed  to  express  all  that  was  under  the  inspection  of  one  bi- 
shop, and  that  people  were  inured  to  such  phrases  as  these, 
the  church  of  fintioch,  the  church  of  Cesarea,  the  church  of 
Constantinople,  and  the  church  of  the  bishop  of  Antioch,  &c., 
the  word  continued  to  be  so  applied,  notwithstanding  the 
change  of  circumstances,  in  consequence  of  which  many  con- 
gregations came  to  be  included.  This  paved  the  way  for 
extending  still  farther  the  import  of  the  term,  and  employing 
ft  in  the  singular  number,  to  denote  all  the  churches  of  a  pro- 

», 


i38  LECTURES  ON 

vince  under  the  same  metropolitan,  or  even  of  one  or  more 
kingdoms  under  the  same  patriarch. 

It  may  not,  however,  be  improper  to  remark,  that  for  several, 
ages  there  remained  here  and  there  the  traces  of  the  footing 
on  which  things  had  forinerly  stood.  In  small  and  distant 
towns  and  villages,  wherein  bishops  had  been  planted,  an  J 
whereof  the  circuinjacent  country  was  but  thinly  peopled,  the 
charge,  even  after  the  conversion  of  all  the  inhabitants,  remain^ 
ed  undivided,  and  the  bishop  was  still  no  more  than  what  every 
bishop  was  primitively,  the  pastor  of  a  single  congregation, 
with  his  assistant,  presbyters,  and  deacons.  But  these  changes, 
in  process  of  time,  gave  place  to  stiil  greater.  When  the  di-. 
vision  of  ancient  parishes,  which  I  shall  henceforth  call  dio-> 
cesses,  became  universal,  the  principal  reason  foV  confining 
them  within  moderate  bounds  entirely  ceased,  and  motives  of 
interest  and  ambition  operated  the  contrary  way  without  coi^- 
trol.  Tile  immediate  dependance  of  the  people,  and  even  of 
the  clergy,  upon  the  bishop,  and  the  connexion  of  ninety-niqe 
parts  in  a  hundred  of  the  diocess  with  the  bishop's  church, 
formerly  the  parish-^church,  now  the  cathedral,  being  totally 
dissolved,  and  the  people  more  commodiously  supplied  in  every 
part  of  the  religious  services,  worship,  sacraments,  and  teach- 
ing, by  those  tituli,  now  called  parish-churches,  newly  erectecl, 
there  needed  no  more  to  abolish  the  presbytery,  whose  princi- 
pal use  subsisted  no  longer.  The  diocess  accordingly  under- 
went a  new  division  into  deaneries,  so  named  from  their  in- 
cluding at  first  ten  parishes,  or  ten  presbyters  in  each,  though 
they  did  not  long  confine  themselves  to  that  number.  The 
president,  called  decanus,  the  dean,  is  properly  an  arch-presby- 
ter, such  as  anciently,  in  the  bishop's  absence,  presided  in  the 
presbyterv.  The  deanery  of  the  cathedral,  consisting  of  the 
clergy,  whose  duty  it  is  to  perform  there  the  sacred  service, 
and  to  preach,  is  denominated  capitulum,  the  chapter,  being, 
as  it  were,  the  head  of  the  clergy  of  the  diocess.  But  the  rural 
deaneries,  as  they  answered  little  purpose,  have,  in  most  places, 
gone  into  disuse.  The  presbj-ters,  who  under  the  dean  offici- 
ated in  the  mothsr-church,  came  to  be  distinguished  from  the 
parochial  clergy  by  the  titles  of  prebendaries  and  canons.  The 
former  name  they  derived  from  the  appointments  called  pre- 
bends, to  which  they  were  entitled,  the  latter  from  the  regula- 
tions to  which  they  were  subjected.  The  chapter  served, 
instead  of  the  presbytery,  in  matters  of  election,  not  only  in 
electing  the  inferiour  officers,  but  in  supplying  vacancies,  in 
concurrence  with  the  bishop,  in  the  prebends  or  canonries  and 
deanship  j  nay,  that  they  anciently,  on  the  decease  or  transla- 


I:CCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY*  139 

iibti  of  the  bishop,  elected  his  successour,  the  conge  ct'elire^ 
still  in  use  in  England,  though  now  no  better  than  a  torm,  is  a 
standhig evidence.  They  had  the  superiniendency  ofthefabiick, 
with  the  goods  and  ornaments  belonging  to  the  cathedrial,  and 
were  also  guardians  of  what  is  now  called  the  spiritualties  of 
the  bishoprick,  when  the  see  was  vacant* 

In  regard  to  the  espiscopal  jurisdiction,  whicn  fextehded 
over  the  whole  diocess,  the  chapter,  consistitig  only  of  the 
clergy  of  the  cathedral,  could  not  be  considered  as  a  pro|Jer 
council.  In  the  bishop's  court  of  judicature,  denominated 
the  consistory,  his  counsellors  and  assessors  in  judgment  when 
he  was  present,  and  delegates  in  his  absence,  were  those  call- 
ed archdeaconsi  The  archdeacon  was  originally  of  the  br-^ 
der  of  deacons,  as  the  name  importsj.  There  was  but  one  of 
them  in  a  diocess.  He  presided  among  those  of  his  own  bf^ 
der,  was  a  constant  attendant  upon  the  bishopi  and  was  consi- 
dered  as  his  prime  minister*  But  some  time  after,  the  parti- 
tion of  diocesses  became  very  general,  particularly  after  the 
country  bishops  were,  through  a  jealously  that  they  would  les- 
sen the  dignity  of  the  order,  suppressed  by  canon,  and  their 
parishes  annexed  to  those  of  the  next  city  bishops,  it  was 
found  convenient  to  elect  those  delegates,  the  archdeacons, 
from  the  order  of  the  presbyters,  and  to  have  more  or  fewer 
in  a  diocess,  according  to  its  extent.  Through  the  influence 
of  custom,  in  opposition  to  propriety,  the  name  archdeacon 
was  retained.  The  diocess  was  accordingly  divided  into 
archdeaconries,  and  these  subdivided  into  deaneries,  not  unlike 
the  division  of  counties  that  obtains  in  England  into  hundreds 
and  tithings.  It  was  then  judged  expedient  to  invest  archdea- 
cons w^ith  a  share  of  episcopal  jurisdiction,  both  in  teinporals 
and  in  spirituals,  within  their  archdeaconries,  where  they 
perform  I  regular  visitations,  like  the  bishops,  hold  spiritual 
courts,  either  in  person  or  by  their  deputies,  called  officials, 
and  are  accounted  dignitaries.  The  only  acts  peculiar  to  the 
bishop  are  confirming  and  ordaining. 

I  have  been  the  more  partictdar  in  this  deductioii,  iti  order 
to  give  at  once  a  faint  sketch  of  the  model  which,  in  a  great 
measure,  still  subsists  in  England  and  Ireland,  and  among  the 
secular  clergy  of  the  church  of  Rome.  The  variations,  in- 
deed, are  considerable,  which  the  influence  of  time  and  local 
customs  have  produced  in  different  places.  A  perfect  uni 
formity  in  these  things  is  not  to  be  expected.  We  are  now 
arrived  at  the  second  step  of  the  hierarchy,  when  prelacy  or 
diocesan  episcopacy  succeeded  the  parochial,  and  began  gene- 
rally to  prevail. 


UO  LECTURES  ON 


LECTURE  IX. 


XN  my  last  lecture,  I  traced  the  origin  of  prelacy,  or  dioce- 
sian  episcopacy.  I  shall  now,  ere  1  proceed,  for  the  further 
illustration  of  the  subject,  contrast  the  two  methods  that  might 
naturally  be  supposed  to  have  suggested  themselves,  upon  the 
great  revolution  in  circumstances  which  the  establishment  of 
Christianity  by  the  imperial  laws,  and  the  numerous  conver- 
sions from  paganism  consequent  thereon,  occasioned  in  the 
church.  There  was  then,  indeed,  an  absolute  necessity  to 
make  a  considerable  alteration  in  the  arrangement  which  had 
subsisted  formerly,  in  order  that  such  multitudes  of  people 
might  be  supplied  with  pastors,  and  with  the  ordinances  of  re- 
ligion. One  way  of  answering  this  end  was  to  attempt  anew 
the  division  of  christian  countries  into  such  parishes,  as  were 
no  more  than  necessary  for  affording  each  a  sufficient  congre- 
gation, and  to  give  each,  as  formerly,  its  own  bishop,  presby- 
ters, and  deacons,  independently  of  every  other  parish.  In 
this  way,  indeed,  there  would  have  been  vast  alterations  made 
on  the  territories  and  local  extent  of  pastoral  charges,  which 
would  have  had  the  appearance  of  dispossessing,  in  a  great 
aieasure,  those  then  actually  in  office.  But  the  form,  as  well 
as  the  spirit,  of  the  model  adopted  in  the  second  century, 
would  have  remained.  And,  indeed,  this  was  the  only  possi- 
ble method  v/hereby  it  could  have  remained  unimpaired. 

The  other  way  was  to  preserve  the  same  division  of  territory 
thac  had  been  made  so  long  before,  and  which  the  people, 
through  custom,  were  brought  to  regard  as  sacred,  to  conti- 
nue the  same  nominal  parishes  in  the  same  hands,  but  in  or- 
der also  to  accommodate  the  parishioners  without  overload- 
ing the  pastors,  to  increase  the  number  of  presbyters,  and  as 
they  couldnot  now  all  convene  in  one  place,  to  erect  a  sortof  sub- 
ordinate chapels  or  churches,  (a  thing  in  thctwo  fir^t-centiirieS 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  141 

probably  not  conceived)  to  affix  to  each  in  subordinatioti  to 
the  prelate  its  proper  presbyter,  who  in  most  things  was  to 
be,  in  respect  ol  this  smaller  parish,  what  the  bishop  had  been 
in  respect  of  the  larger  parish  whereof  it  was  a  part.  If  the 
former  of  these  methods  suited  more  the  primitive  constitu- 
tion of  the  church,  the  latter  (which  in  fact  was  adopted)  was 
more  accommodated  to  the  natural  bent  of  the  imagination. 
It  had  the  appearance  of  paying  a  proper  regard  to  ancient 
land-marks,  of  accommodating  the  people  without  injuring  in- 
dividuals, by  stripping  them  both  of  the  titles  and  of  the  terri- 
tories which  had  been  immemorially  possessed  by  them  and 
their  predecessors. 

Besides,  though  the  accession  of  proselytes  to  the  christian 
cause  was  both  great  and  sudden  on  the  establishment  of  Christi- 
anity as  the  religion  of  the  empire,  there  had  been  a  real,  though 
more  gradual  accession,  for  centuries  before.  And  as  this, 
through  its  being  gradual,  had  never  given  rise  to  any  new 
division,  but,  perhaps,  in  a  few  distant  places,  to  the  erection 
of  country-parishes,  under  the  care  of  those  called  chorepis- 
copi,  or  to  the  addition  of  some  presbyters  to  the  bishop's 
council,  they  would  be  prepared  by  custom  to  adopt  the  se- 
cond method  rather  than  the  first.  1  have  hinted  already, 
that  both  interest  and  ambition  pointed  to  the  same  conduct* 
I  might  add  another  thing,  which  has  no  inconsiderable  influ- 
ence on  our  apprehensions  of  fitness,  that  a  certain  analogy  to 
the  civil  government  would  also  contribute  to  recommend  this^ 
plan.  How  far  this  principle  operated  on  the  advancement  of 
the  hierarchy  to  the  grandeur,  which  in  process  of  time  it  at- 
tained, as  it  is  admitted  by  every  judicious  and  candid  histo- 
rian, shall  be  evinced  more  full)  in  the  sequel. 

Thus  a  circumstance  in  itself  merely  accidental,  and  which 
we  have  reason  to  think  was  not  regarded  as  of  any  moment 
by  the  first  publishers  of  the  gospel,  namely,  the  extent  of  ter- 
ritory that  was  necessary  for  affording  converts  enow  to  make 
a  congregation,  (this  circumstance,  I  say)  aided  by  some  con- 
curring causes,  proved  the  secret  source  of  that  total  change, 
in  respect  of  government,  which  the  church  in  a  few  ages 
after  underwent.  Some  of  those  concurrent  causes'  have  been 
cxplai,ned  already,  and  we  shall  have  occasion  to  investigate 
others  of  them  as  we  proceed.  But  that  we  may,  if  possible, 
be  more  fully  satisfied  of  the  truth  of  the  foregoing  remark, 
in  regard  to  the  rise  of  the  diocesses,  comprehending  many 
congregations  out  of  parishes,  which,  though  generally  the 
same,  or  nearly  so,  in  local  extent,  comprehended  each  but 
one  congregation,  let  us  suppose  that  the  apostles  and  other 
founders  of  the  churches,  instead  of  converting,  as  they  did^  a 


H2  LECTURES  ON 

thirtieth,  or  a  fortieth  part  of  every  city  where  they  preached^ 
had  converted  all  the  inhabitants^  is  it  hot  manifest  that  the 
same  principle  of  combining  as  many  converts  as  would  con- 
stitute a  congregation,  which  made  them  include  the  whole 
city  in  the  parish,  when  the  whole  could  furnish  no  more  than 
one  congregation,  would  have  led  them  to  erect  as  many 
parishes  as  there  were  streets  or  lanes,  whett  each  street  or 
lane  could  afford  the  same  number  which,  as  things  happened, 
were  afforded  by  the  whole  city  ?  Had  this  been  the  case  from 
the  beginning,  such  a  revolution  in  the  circumstances  of  the 
church  as  I  have  endeavoured  to  explain  to  you,  could  never 
have  happened. 

But  I  promised  to  advert  briefly  to  some  other  causes,  which 
concurred  in  producing  the  same  eft'ect.  The  more  effectually 
to  accomplish  this  promise,  it  will  be  necessary  to  turn  back  a 
little,  that  we  may  trace  the  origin  and  progress  of  ecclesiastick 
courts.  I  have  had  frequent  occasion  to  mention  the  presby- 
tery. It  was  the  radical  court,  and  subsisted  from  the  begin- 
ning. Mention  is  made  of  it  in  Scripture.  And  as  a 
plurality  of  pastors  was  settled  in  most  christian  congregations, 
planted  by  the  apostles,  and  as  those  pastors  were  required  to 
conduct  their  matters  with  harmony  and  prudence,  there  was 
a  necessity  that,  for  this  purpose,  they  should  often  meet  and 
consult  together.  This  was  properly  the  council  of  the 
congregation.  And  the  different  congregations,  with  their 
ministers,  seemed,  in  a  great  measure,  independent  of  one 
another.  Every  thing  regarding  their  own  procedure  in  wor- 
ship, as  well  as  discipline,  was  settled  among  themselves* 
But  it  is  extremely  plain,  that  a  total  independency  was  not 
adapted  to  the  more  general  character  that  belonged  to  all 
as  members  of  the  commonwealth  of  Christ.  It  was  not  the 
being  members  of  the  same  congregation  that  constituted  their 
christian  brotherhood  and  unity,  but  the  being  all,  through 
one  Mediator,  adopted  as  children  into  the  family  of  God,  or, 
as  it  is  otherwise  expressed,  the  being  members  of  the  same 
body  whereof  Christ  is  the  head,  and,  consequently,  all  mem- 
bers one  of  another.  As  Christ  is  not  divided,  as  his  cause 
and  interests  will  ever  be  the  same,  it  was  not  less  expedient 
for  maintaining  union,  and  consequently  charity,  through  the 
v/hole  christian  fraternity,  that  the  churches  should  preserve 
a  proper  correspondence  and  intercourse  with  one  another, 
than  it  was  necessary  for  preserving  the  peace  and  harmony 
of  a  congregation,  that  there  should  be  a  settled  order  among 
them  for  conducting  the  religious  ordinances,  and  for  consul- 
ting, deliberating,  and  determining,  in  all  matters  of  common 
concern. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  143 

That  such  an  union  in  everything  essential  to  the  cause,  was. 
what  the  apostles  had  much  at  heart,  is  very  plain  not  only- 
from  the  strain  of  their  writings,  but  from  the  measures, 
they  took  to  get  the  same  rule  universally  to  prevail  in  relation 
to  the  great  dispute  that,  in  their  time,  was  so  hotly  agitated 
about  circumcision,  and  the  other  ceremonies  of  the  law. 
The  rule  which,  in  consequence  of  the  consultation  holden 
at  Jerusalem,  was  unanimously  established  by  the  apostles, 
elders,  and  brethren  there  assembled,  at  the  same  time  that  it 
tended  to  unite  the  disciples  in  love,  and  in  the  observance  of 
every  thing  essential,  breathed  a  spirit  of  forbearance  and  to- 
leration in  matters  merely  circumstantial,  that  bears  but  little 
resemblance  to  the  greater  part  of  the  ecclesiastical  canons  of 
later  date. 

This  example,  doubtless,  suggested  to  the  churches  found- 
ed by  the  apostles,  prophets,  and  evangelists,  to  devise  some 
regular  plan  of  intercourse  with  one  another,  in  order  the 
more  effectually  to  promote  unity  and  brotherly  affection  in  the 
church  universal.  For  this  purpose  the  congregations,  in  the 
same  canton  or  province,  agreed  to  have  stated  conjunct  meet- 
ings, wherein  they  might  discuss  those  matters  which  were  of 
general  concern,  concert  the  measures  that  would  be  necessa- 
ry both  for  the  propagation  of  the  faith  amoiigst  idolaters,  and 
for  the  defence  of  its  purity  from  internal  scandals  and  penii-i 
cious  errours.  Since  it  was  impossible  for  the  whole  people  oi 
many  churches  to  assemble  thus  for  consultation,  it  would  na- 
turally occur,  as  being  of  practicable  methods  the  most  expe- 
dient, that  the  pastors  and  deacons,  who  in  respect  of  office 
were  most  nearly  concerned  in  the  cause,  should,  together 
with  a  delegation  from  the  people  of  the  different  congrega-. 
tions,  convene  in  the  most  commodious  place,  and  treat  toge- 
ther of  those  matters  that  concerned  the  common  salvation. 

That  in  these,  at  first,  the  people  had  a  share  as  well  as  the 
pastors,  we  have  sufficient  ground  from  primitive  writers  to 
believe.  I  shall  mention  but  a  few  of  the  many  authorities 
which,  in  support  of  this  matter,  might  be  produced.  Euse- 
bius,  in  the  synodical  epistle  he  has  preserved  in  his  history, 
b.  vii,  1.  30,  from  the  assembly  or  synod  at  Antioch,  which 
condemned  Paulus  Samosatenus,  thus  titles  the  persons  (or 
rather  represents  them  as  titling  themselves)  who  had  concur- 
red in  that  measure,    cTrio-iuiTrot  kxi  zr^sa-^vlsfai,  KMt  ^iXKavoi,  KMi  ai  ey.KXfi' 

cixt  Tn  B-ea;  the  bishops,  and  presbyters,  and  deacons,  and  the 
churches  of  God.  When  the  term  churches  is  thus  contra- 
distinguished from  the  pastors,  it  always  denotes  the  people. 
Nor  are  someof  these  classes  represented  here  as  actors,  and 
others  only  as  spectators,  or  passive  consenlers.     What  was 


lU.  LECTURES  ON 

acted  on  this  occasioa,  is  exhibited  as  alike  the  action  of  all. 
Hpflfcyits«.9T!,«t.£»  «•;.  x.  t.  A.  "  We  were  therefore  under  a  necessi- 
*'  ty  of  expelling  this  adversary  of  God,  and  settling  another 
*'  bishop  in  his  stead*." 

I  shall  produce  but  one  other  authority,  which  is  a  letter  to 
Cyprian,  the  31st  in  his  epistles,  from  the  presbyters  and  dea- 
cons of  Rome,  in  relation  to  the  lapsed,  wherein  we  find  these 
words  :  '-'■  Quanquam  nobis  in  tarn  ingenti  negotio  placeat, 
*'  quod  et  tu  ipse  tractasti  prius  ;  ecclesiae  pacem  sustinendam, 
"  deinde,  sic  collatione  consiliorum  cum  episcopis,  presbyte- 
*^  ris,  diaconis,  confessoribus,  pariter  ac  stantibus  laicis  facta, 
*'^  lapsorum  tractare  rationem."  Here  laymen,  who  had  con- 
tinued firm  in  times  of  persecution,  are  judged  proper  to  be 
joined  in  council  on  this  most  important  subject,  with  bishops, 
presbyters,  deacons,  and  confessors,  or  those,  whether  lay- 
men or  clergymen,  who  had  suffered  for  the  testimony  of 
Jesus.  The  same  thing  may  also  be  evinced  from  the  14th  and 
the  26th  of  his  epistles,  and  from  the  account  he  gives  of  the 
African  synod,  holden  at  Carthage,  for  determining  the  ques- 
tion that  had  been  raised  about  the  rebaptization  of  hereticks. 
To  what  purpose  insist  that  those  courts  were  often  styled 
synods  of  bishops,  and  that  the  decisions  are  sometimes  as- 
cribed to  the  bishops,  and  no  mention  made  of  any  other  or- 
der. It  is  admitted,  that  this  was  the  principal  order,  and  at 
that  time  essential  to  the  existence  of  a  synod,  which,  proba- 
bly, the  other  orders  were  not.  Hence  a  synod  might  natural- 
ly be  denominated  a  convention  of  bishops.  It  is  admitted 
further,  that  there  have  been  svnods  in  which  no  other  mem- 
bers were  present.  From  neither  of  these  concessions  can  we 
infer,  in  contradiction  to  direct  testimony,  that  this  was  the 
case  with  all  synods,  and  that  none  of  any  inferiour  order  had 
a  voice  among  them,  either  legislative  or  judicial.  In  our 
church  judicatories  in  Scotland,  presbyteries,  synods,  and 
assemblies,  (for  church-sessions  consist  mostly  of  the  laity) 
the  numbers  of  ministers  and  of  laymen,  who  are  constituent 
members,  are  nearly  equal.  Yet  they  are  familiarly  termed 
meetings  of  the  clergy,  and  it  sometimes  happens,  both  m 
presbyteries  and  in  synods,  that  none  are  present  hut  minis- 

*  How  trifliiig  is  the  attempt  to  elude  the  force  of  this  argument,  by  saying 
that  as  to  the  inferiour  orders  and  the  people,  this  address  ought  to  be  considered 
as  conveying  only  their  salutations.  The  only  place  in  a  letter  for  coraplimental 
salutations,  is  the  end.  Tae  title  bears  always  (and  to  this  use  it  is  appropriated) 
the  desig  VA'ion  of  those  by  whom,  and  of  those  to  whom  the  letter  is  sent.  Here 
we  perceive,  as  plainly  as  we  can  perceive  an)  thing  by  the  help  of  langijage,  the 
d'm'eient  classes  oi  persotis  above-mentioned  giving  an  account  of  their  joint  pro- 
Ctediajrs. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  14| 

ters.  They  make  a  regular  court  notwithstanding  ;  whereas 
lay-elders  without  ministers  would  not  make  an  ecclesiastic^' 
judicatory.     But  to  return. 

In  the  manner  above  explained,  the  churches  maintained  a 
mutual  correspondence,  consulting  with  one  another  in  all  mat- 
ters of  very  great  and  general  concernment,  insomuch  that 
there  arose  a  sort  of  republick  from  the  association  of  th&, 
churches  in  a  particular  province,  which  was,  in  a  manner,* 
governed  by  its  council  or  synod.  Some  of  these  synods  me^ 
annually,  others  twice  a  year,  or  even  oftener,  if  occasion 
required.  The  divisions  of  the  country  made  by  the  civil  go- 
vernment were  commonly  adopted  here,  not  as  necessary,  but 
as  commodious,  and  affording  opportunities  on  other  accounts^ 
of  ^sembling  more  frequently.  The  metropolis  of  the  pro«. 
vince,  as  being  the  most  centrick,  or  at  least  the  most  convcri,; 
nient,  was  the  usual  place  of  meeting  ;  and  the  bishop  of  that 
place,  from  a  sort  of  natural  title  to  preside  in  the  convention, 
came  by  the  gradual,  but  sure  operation  of  custom,  to  be  re- 
garded as  the  head  of  the  body.  Hence  the  bishop  of  the  me- 
tropolis came  very  naturally  to  be  denominated  the  metropo# 
litan  ;  and  this  term  was,  by  consequence,  understood  to  de- 
note his  presidency  over  the  bishops  of  the  province.  This 
custom,  however,  did  not  obtain  every  where  from  the  begin- 
ning. At  first,  the  office  of  president  seems  generally  to  have 
hten  elective,  and  to  have  continued  no  longer  than  the  sessiou;: 
of  the  synod.  Nor  did  it  ever  obtain  in  the  provinces  of  Afri-t 
ca,  (except  Africa  propria,  of  which  the  bishop  of  Carthage 
was  always  metropolitan)  nor  of  Numidia  and  Mauritania,, 
for  in  these  the  honour  of  presidency  was  determined  by  seni- 
ority. The  senior  bishop  was  president  of  the  synod,  and 
head  of  the  province.  Accordingly  with  them  he  was  deno- 
minated primus^  primate,  and  not  metropolitan.  In  this, 
however,  the  African  churches  remained  singular.  But  even 
this  singularity  sufficiently  confutes  those  vain  patronisers  of 
the  hierarchy,  who  are  absurd  enough  to  derive  the  metropoli- 
tical  primacy,  as  well  as  the  patriarchal  sovereignty  from 
apostolical  institution.  Thus  the  presidency  of  this  new  dig- 
nitary over  the  bishops  evidently  sprang  from  the  identical 
causes,  which  first  raised  the  bishop  above  the  presbyters,  and 
not  long  after,  as  we  shall  see,  subjected  the  metropolitans, 
themselves. 

For  this  fraternal  intercourse  was,  in  process  of  time,  still 
further  extended.  As  all  the  provinces  within  the  same  pre- 
fecture had  a  closer  connexion  with  one  another,  than  those 
which  happened  to  have  different  civil  governours,  and  to  be 
wore  disjoined,  this  communion,  in  respect  of  ecclesiastipk 

T 


i4S  LECTURES  ON 

polity,  was  enlarged,  and  councils  were  sometimes  convened 
irom  all  the  thurches  within  the  prefecture,  or  at  least  the  civii 
dioccss,  which  gradually  gave  the  bishop  of  the  capital,  where 
the  prelect  had  his  residence,  and  kept  his  court,  the  like  as- 
cendant over  the  metropolitans,  within  the  bounds  of  that 
jurisdiction,  which  the  latter  had  obtained,  from  similar 
causes,  over  the  bishops  withm  their  respective  provinces. 
These  prefectures  were  the  imperial  city  of  Rome,  which 
presided  over  all  the  suburbiary  provinces,  as  they  were  called  ; 
the  city  of  Alexandria,  which  governed  Egypt,  L-;  bia,  and 
Pentapolis  ;  the  city  of  Anticch,  comprehending  under  it  Sy- 
ria, and  other  oriental  provinces  ;  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  com- 
prehending Palestine  and  Arabia  Pen  sea,  onginail\  and  pro-, 
peri}  a  part  of  the  civil  diocess  of  Antioch  ;  and  lastly.  Con- 
st intinople,  which  being  the  seat  of  empire,  came  by  degrees, 
through  the  favour  of  the  emperours,  to  attain  such  extensive 
dominion,  and  high  prerogatives,  as  to  appear,  for  a  while,  a 
formidable  rival,  if  not  an  overmatch  for  Rome  herself.  In 
the  western  dioc .  sses  of  Gaul,  Spain,  and  Britain,  there  seem 
to  have  been  no  patriarchs,  though  there  were  as  many  metro- 
politans as  provinces,  which  were  pretty  numerous.  Indeed, 
this  want  appears  to  have  given  the  bishop  of  Rome,  in  after- 
ages,  a  great  ascendant  over  them,  the  metropolitans  being  too 
inconsiderable  to  cope  with  him.  The  patriarchs  were  likewise 
called  archbishops,  though  this  denomination  was  also  givento 
the  primates,  and  even  sometimes  as  an  honorary  title  to 
those  who  were  but  bishops.  1  here  were  some  other  bishops 
of  less  note  than  the  patriarchs,  but  superiour  to  the  metro- 
politans, in  those  governments  by  the  Greeks  called  eparchicks, 
on  whom  the  intermediate  title  and  dignity  of  exarch  w  ere 
conferred.  Thus  the  bishop  of  Ephesus  was  styled  exarch  of 
the  Asiatic  diocess,  and  the  bishop  of  Cesarea,  in  Cappadocia, 
exarch  of  the  Pontick.  Now  each  of  these  comprehended  ten 
Or  eleven  provinces  under  their  respective  metropolitans,  and 
each  province  a  considerable  number  of  bishopricks.  But  I 
do  not  intend  to  enter  into  minute  particulars.  Those  I  have 
3jamed  were  the  chief. 

This  polity  having  been  gradually  introduced,  and  estab- 
lished partly  by  custom,  parth  by  imperial  authority,  received, 
according  to.  some,  the  sanction  of  the  first  ecumenical  coun- 
cil assembled  at  Nice,  under  Constantine,  the  first  christian 
emperour,  in  which  a  canon  (so  the  laws  of  the  church  are  de- 
noiniaated)  was  enacted,  making  the  subordination  which  then 
obtained  perpetual.  But  there  are  who  think,  that  that  canon 
exfeoded  onl\- to  the  power  of  metropolitans  ;  for  that  the 
patriarchal,  not  having  yet  got  firm  footing,  did  not  receive  the 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  Uf 

Sanction  of  the  church  till  about  fifty  years  afterwards*  It  is 
remarkable,  that  the  verv  same  powers  which  the  bishops  had 
rjaimed  and  acquired  over  the  presbyters,  were  now  first  claim* 
ed  and  acquired  by  the  metropolitans  over  the  bishops,  and 
soon  after  by  the  patriarchs  over  the;  metropolitanso  The  pres- 
bytery was  the  bishop's  court,  which  he  had  the  power  of  con* 
vening  when  he  judged  it  proper,  and  wherein  he  presided* 
The  same  prerogatives  were  exercised  by  the  metropolitan,  in 
regard  to  the  provincial  synod,  and  by  the  patriarch,  in  regard 
to  the  diocesan  council.  And  as  to  the  power  of  convoking 
an  ecumenical  council,  nothing  is  more  evident  than  that,  for 
some  ages,  it  was  claimed  and  exercised  only  by  the  emperoun 
Such  a  council  or  assembly  was  denominated  ecumenical  from 
the  Greek  word  oty.iif.unj-.  the  name  then  commonly  given  to  the 
Roman  empire.  The  charge  of  a  presbyter  was  now  called  a 
parishi,  and  that  of  th.;  bishop  a  diocess  ;  and  sometimes;,  for 
distinction's  sake,  a  smaller  diocess,  the  district  under  the  me^ 
tropolitan's  jurisdiction  was  named  a  province,  and  that  under 
the  patriarchs  a  larger  diocess,  being  the  satne  (or  nearly  so) 
with  what  v/as  termed  a  dioce.ss  in  the  civil  division  of  the 
empire.  As  the  bishop  claimed  an  exclusive  title  to  ordain, 
his  presbyters,  the  same  was  challenged  by  the  metropolitan, 
in  regard  to  the  consecration  of  the  bishops  of  his  province^ 
fend  by  the  patriarch  in  the  instalment  of  the  metropolitans  of 
his  diocess.  The  umpirage  exercised  by  the  bishop  in  deter- 
mining the  differences  that  arose  amongst  his  presbyters,  came 
also  to  be  exercised  b)'  the  metropolitan  over  the  bishops,  and 
by  the  patriarch,  or  exarch,  over  the  metropolitans.  Thus 
there  was  an  established  scale  of  authority  from  the  lowest 
orders  in  the  church  to  the  patriarchs,  who  were  the  highest, 
and  who  were  the  judges  of  all  ecclesiastical  matters  in 
the  last  resort ;  for  there  obtained  also  a  regular  course  of 
appeal  from  the  inferiour  to  the  superiour  orders,  as  well  as 
synods* 

It  may  not  be  improper  to  take  notice  here  in  passings  thafe 
as  the  superiour  oi'ders.  a()Ove-mentioned,  sprang  up  and  grew 
into  consideration  in  the  church,  there  was  also  introduced^ 
especially  in  the  populous  cities,  a  number  of  inferiour  orders, 
by  whose  means  the  deacons  were  relieved  of  some  of  the 
more  menial  parts  of  the  service,  which  had  formerly,  before 
they  were  grown  so  considerable,  been  required  of  them. 
Such  were  sub-deacons,  acolvtes,  readers,  singers,  exorcists, 
janitors,  and  some  others,  for  they  were  not  the  same  in  all 
churches.  What  cardinal  Bona  said  of  the  inferiour  O'ders 
may  be  justly  said  of  all  the  orders,  the  two  original  ones 
(bishop   and  deacon)  alone    excepted.      "  Contigit  nimirum 


148  LECTURES  ON 

"  ecclesias  quod  hominibus  solet,  qui  dum  tenue  patrimoniuin 
"  habent,  uno  servo  contenti  sunt,  qui  solus  omnia  administrat. 
*'  Si  vero  reditus  augeantur,  servorum  etiam  augetur  nunnerus  ; 
"  eoque  magis  crescit  familia,  quo  illi  locupletiores  et  spectabi- 
"  liores  e\  adunt.  Sic  evangelicee  predicationis  initio  parvula 
"  adhuc  et  latitans  ecclesia  paucis  indiguit  ecclesiasticarum 
"  functionuni  ministris.  Cresccnte  autem  credentium  multi- 
"  tudine,  et  auctis  facultatibus,  ex  fidelium  oblationibus,  cum 
*'  soli  diaconi  non  possent  omnibus  incumbere,  diversa  onera 
"  et  officia  diversis  personis  distributa  sunt;  ex  quo  factum 
*'  est  ut  splendidiori  et  augustioii  apparatu  ecclesiasticarum 
"  functionum  ceremoniae  peragerentur."  [De  Rebus  Liturg» 
1,  1,  c.  XXV,  §  17,]  on  which  Basnage  remarks,  "  Atque  ex 
"  incremento  ecclesiae  non  officia,  sed  ministri,  crescere  debue- 
"  runt."  True.  And  if  the  increase  of  the  church  had  been 
solely  in  the  number  of  believers,  an  increase  of  ministers, 
and  not  of  ministries,  would  possibly  have  sufficed.  But  as 
there  came  also  a  great  accession  of  wealth  and  splendour  to 
the  church  and  churchmen^  as  the  words  are  now  understood,  a 
variety  of  offices  or  degrees  was  requisite  to  suit  the  claims 
and  expectations  of  men  of  various  conditions.  Kings  and 
princes  have  not  only  many  servants,  but  many  offices  under 
them,  adapted  to  men  of  different  ranks. 

But  to  return  to  the  superiour  orders.  I  do  not  say  that  all 
the  adjustments  I  have  mentioned,  in  regard  to  their  respec- 
tive privileges  and  authority,  were  observed  uniformly  and 
universally.  There  still  remained  considerable  differences  in 
the  customs  that  obtained  in  different  places.  And  it  was 
hardly  possible  it  should  be  otherwise,  considering  the  manner 
in  wliich  this  power  arose.  But  the  account  given  above  is  a 
just  representation  of  what  was,  in  the  main,  the  state  and  con- 
stitution of  the  church,  universal  during  part  of  the  third, 
fourth,  the  fifth,  and  some  successive  centuries.  There  were 
no  doubt  many  causes  which  cannot  here  be  specified,  that  co- 
operated in  raising  this  wonderful  fabrick  of  church-dominion, 
which  was  now  become  a  kind  of  oligarchy,  the  administration 
whereof  rested  ultimately  in  the  patriarchs.  Among  these 
causes  none  of  the  least  was  (as  power  always  follows  property) 
the  vast  accession  of  wealth,  which,  by  the  numei'ous  conver- 
sions of  pagans  of  high  rank,  accrued  at  last  to  the  bishops  of 
the  principal  cities. 

When,  in  the  fourth  century,  Christianity,  as  we  usually 
speak,  became  the  religion  of  the  empire,  the  like  combination, 
of  a  still  greater  number  of  churches,  and  such  as  were  more 
widely  diffused  through  Christendom,  was  effected  with  the 
assistance  of  the  eraperour.     This  last  kind  of  congress  was 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  149 

denominated  a  general  or  ecumenical  council.  Every  one  must 
perceive,  that  the  greater  the  number  of  churches  was,  from 
whom  a  deputation  was  required,  the  fewer  deputies  they 
could  admit  from  each.  The  natural  consequence  of  this 
would  be,  that  when  the  christian  community  came  to  spread 
over  an  immense  extent  of  territory,  and  to  become  very  po- 
pulous by  the  accession  of  multitudes  of  new  proselytes,  the 
privilege  of  representing  the  different  congregations  would 
come  entirely  into  the  hands  of  the  pastors.  Nay,  even  of 
these  at  last,  especially  in  the  diocesan  synods  and  ecumeni- 
cal councils,  there  would  be  found  access  for  none  but  digni- 
taries. And  in  this  manner  the  laity  would  come  by  degrees 
(as  in  fact  it  happened)  to  be  entirely  justled  out.  We  cannot 
be  surprised  that,  in  consequence  of  this  a  power  which  at 
first  may  be  justly  said  to  have  been  derived,  should,  in  process 
of  time,  be  accounted  original,  and  that  what  in  the  beginning 
had  been  conferred  by  election,  should  at  last  be  considered  as 
inherent  in  particular  offices. 

From  the  imperfection  of  the  ecclesiastick  history  of  the  first 
ages,  it  is  impossible  to  trace  the  progress  of  usurpation 
through  its  various  stages  with  all  the  clearness  that  could  be 
wished.  Enough,  however,  may  be  clearly  discovered,  when 
we  compare  the  state  of  things  in  latter  times  with  what  we 
learn  from  the  sacred  records,  and  from  the  genuine  undis- 
puted remains  of  the  apostolick  fathers,  to  satisfy  us  both  of 
the  reality  and  of  the  greatness  of  that  usurpation. 

There  are  very  few,  either  protestants  or  papists,  who  with 
Baronius,  and  the  other  tools  of  ecclesiastick  tyranny,  pretend 
to  assign  to  the  metropolitical  or  patriarchal  authority  an  apos- 
tolical original,  yet  there  is  not  a  single  objection  that  can  be 
raised  against  the  feasibility  of  an  acquisition  of  pov/er  in  the 
bishops  over  the  presbyters,  that  does  not  operate  with  at  least 
equal  force  against  the  feasibility  of  such  an  acquisition  in  the 
metropolitans  over  the  bishops,  and  in  the  patriarchs  over  the 
metropolitans  j  and,  I  may  add,  with  equal  reason,  (as  it  came 
afterwards,  in  a  great  measure,  to  obtain)  in  the  pope  over  the 
whole  or  greater  part  of  the  christian  world.  There  is  a  gra- 
dation in  the  whole  progress  :  the  steps  by  which  we  ascend 
are  exactly  similar.  Nor  is  the  origin  of  any  one  part  of  the 
system  more  unaccountable  than  of  another. 

Many  strenuous  advocates  for  episcopacy  do  not  admit,  that 
there  was  originally  any  visible  power  in  the  church  paramount; 
to  that  of  the  bishops,  who  were  all,  in  this  respect,  on  a  foot 
of  perfect  equality.  There  was  no  "  episcopus  episcoporum," 
say  they,  no  bishop  of  bishops,  but  Christ.  Yet  the  fact  is 
Undeniable,  that  the  jurisdiction  of  the  metropolitans  and  pri» 


150  LECTURES  ON 

mates  which  these  men  consider  as  mere  usurpation,  c^me,  in 
a  few  centuries,  very  easily  and  universally  to  obtain  ;  inso- 
much, that  Dodwell's  smart  expostulation  with  the  presbyte- 
rians  may,  without  the  smallest  diminution  of  energy,  be 
retorted  upon  himself.  Change  but  the  word  presbyteriis  into 
provinciisy^  and  the  argument  is  the  same,  **•  Quid  enim  ?  Fate- 
"  buntur  fuisse  ^tAowp^ry;,  qui  pares  non  ferrent,  Pompeios? 
"  Nee  interim  agnoscent  in  provinciis  fuisse  Csesares,  prio- 
*'  rum  pariter  iinpatientes  ?"  Will  they  acknowledge^  that 
among  so  many  Pompeys^  who  could  endure  no  equals  there  was 
not  in  the  provinces  one  Cces:ar^  who  could  suffer  no  sitperiour  ? 
In  fact,  the  rise  of  the  bishop's  power  over  the  presbyters  is 
more  easily  accounted  for  than  that  of  the  metropolitans  over 
the  bishops.  The  situation  of  things  m  the  church  was  totally- 
changed  ;  and  it  could  not  be  said  now,  as  it  might  with  truth 
of  the  second  century,  that  as  no  secular  end  could  be  promot- 
ed, there  was  no  rational  motive  to  excite  either  avarice  or 
ambition  on  the  one  side,  and  consequently  to  rouse  jealousy 
on  the  other.  An  ascendant,  which  appeared  to  be  the  result 
merely  of  superiour  zeal  and  virtue,  and  attended  with  more 
imminent  danger,  would  not  be  warmly  opposed,  whilst  world- 
ly motives  had  hardly  scope  to  operate. 

If  for  our  direction  in  forming  a  judgment  concerning  the 
persons  who  were  originally,  and  seem  to  be  naturally,  entitled* 
to  have  a  share  in  all  consultations  about  church-affairs,  we 
recur  to  the  account  given  us  in  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  the 
Acts,  concerning  the  assembly  convened  at  Jerusalem,  on 
occasion  of  the  dispute  about  circumcision,  v/e  can  be  at  no 
loss  as  to  the  privilege  of  the  people  in  this  respect.  Those 
who  composed  that  convention  were  (as  the  sacred  historian 
informs  us)  the  apostles,  elders,  and  brethren  ;  first  the  apos- 
tles, the  extraordinary  ministers  of  Jesus,  who  were  destined 
to  be  the  founders  of  his  church,  and  whose  office,  like  the 
title  that  expressed  it,  was  temporary,  and  expired  with  them  ; 
secondly,  the  elders,  7rpes-(svl£^ot,  the  stated  and  ordinary  pastors^ 
whose  office  was  successive  and  perpetual ;  thirdly,  the  bre- 
thren, that  is,  as  the  term  in  the  New  Testament  is  known  to 
denote,  private  christians,  who  possessed  no  particular  charge 
or  office  in  the  church.  And  to  cut  off  all  pretext,  that  these 
last  were  present  only  as  witnesses  or  bystanders,  the  decree 
runs  as  much  in  their  name  as  in  the  name  of  the  apostles  and 
presbyters,  being  given  expressly  and  authoritatively  as  the 
joint  command  of  all  the  three  classes  mentioned.  Thus  v* 
23,  &c.  "  The  apostles,  and  elders,  and  brethren,  send  greet- 
"  ing  to  the  brethren  which  are  of  the  Gentiles.  I'orasnuich 
"  as  we  have  heard,  it  seemed  good  unto  us,  being  assembled 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  151 

"  with  one  accord,  to  lay  upon  you  no  greater  burden  than 
*  these  necessary  things." 

I  do  not  say  that  that  meeting  could  be  denominated  either 
a  provincial  or  a  diocesan  synod,  and  far  less  a  general  council. 
This  model  ot"  management,  in  regard  to  ecclesiastick  matters, 
w;is  not  then  devised.  But  that  the  apostles  themselves,  not- 
withsianding  their  supernatural  gifts,  called  the  private  disci- 
ples to  assist  in  the  determination  of  matters  of  publick  con- 
cernment, may  serve  as  demonstration  to  us  of  the  natural 
title  that  such  have  (whatever  be  the  model)  to  participate  in 
those  councils  whereby  the  christian  community  are  to  be 
concluded.  And  that  private  christians  continued,  in  the  first 
ages,  to  share  in  the  deliberations  of  their  synods,  we  have 
suificient  evidence,  as  was  signified  already,  from  the  ancient 
ecclesiastical  writings  still  extant. 

fiowever,  as  in  the  space  of  a  few  centuries  matters  were, 
in  this  respect,  greatly  altered,  and  the  church  w^ore  a  new 
face,  and  as  these  came  at  last  to  be  totally  excluded,  it  began 
of  course  to  be  maintained  as  a  doctrine,  that  those  persons, 
who  did  not  belong  to  any  of  the  sacred  orders,  were  absolute- 
1}  unfit  for  being  received  into  their  councils,  to  deliberate  and 
judge  in  spiritual  and  holy  things  ;  that  for  the  pastors  to 
admit  them,  would  be  to  betray  their  trust,  and  profane  their 
office  ;  and  for  such  unhallowed  men  to  arrogate  any  power  in 
these  matters,  would  be  no  better  than  a  sacrilegious  usur- 
pation. 

But  before  such  tenets  as  these,  which  savour  so  much  of 
the  political  views  of  an  aspiring  faction,  and  so  little  of  the 
liberal  spirit  of  the  gospel,  coidd  generally  obtain,  several 
causes  had  contributed  in  preparing  the  minds  of  the  people. 
On  every  occurrence  the  pastors  had  taken  care  to  improve  the 
respect  of  the  lower  ranks,  by  widening  the  distance  between 
their  own  order,  and  the  condition  of  their  christian  brethren  ; 
and  for  this  purpose  had  early  broached  a  distinction,  which, 
in  process  ot  time,  universally  prevailed,  of  the  whole  christian 
commonwealth  into  clergy  and  laity.  The  terms  are  derived 
from  two  Greek  words,  »;uj^o;.  lot  or  inheritance,  and  A««5.  peo- 
ple. The  plain  intention  was  to  suggest,  that  the  former,  the 
pastors  or  clergy,  for  they  appropriated  the  term  K>o,foi;  to 
themselves,  were  selected  and  contradistinguished  from  the 
multitude,  as  being,  in  the  present  world,  by  way  of  eminence, 
God's  peculium^  or  special  inheritance. 

It  is  impossible  to  conceive  a  claim  in  appearance  more 
arrogant,  or  in  reality  worse  founded.  God  is  indeed  in  the 
Old  Testament  said  to  be  the  inheritance  of  the  Levites, 
because  a  determined  share  of  the  sacrifices  and  offerinjrs  made 


152  Z.ECTirRES  ON 

to  God  v^as  in  part  to  serve  them  instead  of  an  estate  in  land> 
such  as  was  given  to  each  of  the  other  tribes.  But,  I  pray  you, 
mark  the  difference  ;  no  where  is  the  tribe  of  Levi  called  God's 
inheritance,  though  that  expression  is  repeatedly  used  of  the 
whole  nation.  Concerning  the  whole  Israelitish  nation, 
Moses,  who  was  himself  a  Levite,  says  in  an  address  to  God, 
Deut.  ix,  29, — -''  The}-  are  thy  people,  and  thine  inheritance, 
*'  which  thou  broughtest  out  by  thy  mighty  power."  The 
words  in  the  septuagint  translation  deserve  our  particular 
attention.  Ovroi  A«£««  m  x^  y.^aifio';  era  «5  s^i/yxyei;  tx  yr^i  Afyvrla  e*  7» 
t<rxvi  Fn  rt)  fjLiyccht).  The  same  persons  are  in  the  same 
sentence  declared  to  be  both  the  Xcca  and  the  xAs??e5-  What, 
says  the  canonist,  at  once  laymen  and  clergy  ?  That  is  certainly 
absurd ;  the  characters  are  incompatible  :  yet  it  did  not  then 
appear  so  to  Moses.  Nov/  v/ould  it  be  thought  reasonable  or 
just,  that  what  was  allowed  to  be  the  privilege  and  the  glory 
of  every  Israelite,  under  the  more  servile  establishment  of 
Moses,  should,  under  the  more  liberal  dispensation  of  the 
gospel,  be  disclaimed  by  all  those  disciples  of  Jesus,  who  have 
not  been  admitted  into  the  sacred  order,  which  they,  for  this 
reason,  have  called  clerical. 

When  we  recur  to  the  use  of  the  term  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, we  find  one  passage,  and  but  one,  wherein  it  is  applied 
to  persons.  The  passage  is  in  the  first  epistle  of  Peter,  the 
fifth  chapter,  and  third  verse,  which  is  thus  rendered  in  our 
version.  "  Neither  as  being  Lords  over  God's  heritage,  but 
'*  being  ensamples  to  the  flock."     The  words  in  the  origii-al 

are,    (v^^     ue,    Kvpicvoilii    rav     x,?i>;pei»),     aX?M   tk/ttoi    yive[^;ui    th    TroiiMiH. 

They  are  part  of  a  charge  given  to  the  presbyters,  or  pastors, 
relating  to  their  care  of  the  people  committed  to  them,  who  are 
called  God's  flock,  which  they  are  commanded  to  feed,  of  which 
they  are  to  take  the  oversight,  not  the  mastery,  and  to  which 
they  are  to  serve  as  patterns.  The  same  persons,  therefore, 
who  both  in  this,  and  in  the  preceding  verse,  are  styled  voifA.- 
vtev,  the  flock,  under  the  direction  of  God's  ministers,  the  shep- 
herds, are  also  called  xAjji'o/  his  inheritance,  over  whom  their 
pastors  are  commanded  not  to  domineer.  It  is  somewhat 
extraordinary,  that  in  the  choice  of  distinctions,  which  the 
church-rulers  so  soon  showed  a  disposition  to  affect,  they 
should  have  paid  almost  as  little  attention  to  the  style,  as  they 
did  to  the  spirit  and  meaning  of  the  sacred  books.  Let  it  be 
observed  then,  in  the  first  place,  that  this  distinction,  so  far 
from  having  a  foundation  in  Scripture,  stands  in  direct  contra- 
diction both  to  the  letter,  and  to  the  sense  of  that  unerring 
standard.  I  am  not  ignorant  that  some  expositors,  jealous  for 
the  priesthood,  render  the  term  »a?;/jo<  here,  the  church's  posses- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY^  153 

sions.  Not  to  mention  that  this  explication  but  ill  suits  the 
context,  and  annihilates  the  contrast  between  an  imperious 
master  and  an  engaging  patron,  and  supposeth  an  awkward 
ellipsis  in  the  words,  allow  me  to  ask,  What  were  the  church's 
possessions  in  those  days  ?  Was  she  so  early  vest  rd  with  lauds 
and  hereditaments,  for  it  is  to  such  only  that  the  term  kAjj^©-, 
when  denoting  property  or  possession,  is  applied?  Or  have 
those  mterpreters  been  dreaming  of  the  truly  golden  age  of 
pope  Gregory  the  seventh,  when  the  patrimonies  of  some 
metropolitical  and  patriarchal  sees  were  indeed  like  dukedoms 
and  principalities,  and  the  grand  hierarch  himself  could  dispose 
of  kingdoms  and  empires  ?  In  the  apostolick  times,  on  the 
contrary,  the  church's  patrimony  consisted  mostly,  I  may  say, 
in  persecution  and  calumny,  hatred  and  derision,  agreeably  to 
the  prediction  of  her  Lord. 

Some  have  ascribed,  but  very  unjustly,  the  origin  of  the 
distinction  we  have  been  considering,  to  Clemens  Romanus, 
who,  in  his  epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  which  I  had  formerly 
an  occasion  of  quoting,  contradistinguishes  a«x«o<  (the  laicks,  as 
we  shoidd  be  apt  to  render  it)  among  the  Jews,  from  the  high- 
priest,  the  priests,  and  the  Levites.  It  ought  to  be  observed, 
that  it  is  introduced  by  him  when  speaking  of  the  Jewish 
priesthood,  and  not  of  the  christian  ministry  ;  neither  does  it 
stand  in  opposition  to  any  one  general  term  such  as  xA^^a?  or 
KMipiKot  i  but  after  mentioning  three  different  orders,  he  uses 
the  term  Xa-tMi^  to  include,  under  one  comprehensive  name,  all 
that  were  not  specially  comprised  under  any  of  the  former ; 
and  in  this  respect  it  exactly  corresponds  to  the  application 
sometimes  made  of  the  Latin  word  popularis.  In  this  view  it 
may  with  equal  propriety  be  contrasted  with  men  in  office  of 
any  kind  whatever.  Thus  in  speaking  of  civil  government,  it 
may  be  opposed  to  etp^evlii,  to  denote  the  people  as  distin- 
guished from  the  magistrates  ;  or,  in  speaking  of  any  army,  to 
?-px%yet,  to  denote  the  soldiers  as  distinguished  from  the  com- 
manders or  officers. 

I  maintain  further,  that  in  the  way  the  term  is  emplo)'ed  by 
Clement,  it  does  not  imply  that  he  considered  it  as  in  itself 
exclusive  of  the  priesthood  and  Levitical  tribe,  to  which  the 
term  a«/ko<  is  opposed  in  that  passage.  They  are  here  indeed 
excluded,  because  separately  named,  but  not  from  the  import 
of  the  word.  But  as  this  criticism  may,  to  a  superficial  hear- 
er, appear  a  mere  subtlety  or  refinement,  I  shall  illustrate  it 
from  some  similar  examples,  which  I  hope  will  be  thought 
decisive.  Acts  xv,  22.  "  Then  pleased  it  the  apostles  and  el- 
"  ders  with  the  whole  church."  Here  are  three  orders  plainly 
mentioned  and  distinguished,  the  apostles  or  extraordinary 

u 


154  LECTURES  ON 

ininisters,  the  elders  or  fixed  pastors,  and  the  church  or  chris-? 
tian  people.  But  does  this  Imply  that  the  narat  church  does 
not  properly  comprehend  the  pastors  as  well  as  tht  people  ? 
By  no  means.  1  hey  are  not  indeed,  in  this  passage,  -  onj- 
prised  under  the  term,  not  because  it  does  not  properh  txteiid 
so  far,  (which  is  not  fact)  but  because  they  are  separately 
named.  The  import  oi  the  expression  is,  therefore,  no  more 
than  this,  '-'■  The  apostles  and  elders,  with  all  the  christian 
*'  brethren,  who  come  not  under  either  of  these  denomina- 
"  tions."  Of  the  same  kind  exactly  is  the  pass;*ge  lately 
quoted  from  Peter,  where  the  '^^la-jivhpoi  are  opposed  to  the  jcX^iea, 
not  as  though  the  former  constituted  no  ipun  of  God's  heri- 
tage, or,  to  adopt  the  modern  style,  clergy  ;  they  onl)'  do  not 
constitute  that  part,  of  which  they  are  here  commanded  to 
take  the  >.harge.  In  like  manner  Clement's  mention  of  as6<ko*, 
after  speaking  of  the  several  orders  of  the  Jewish  priesthood, 
impoi  ts  neither  more  nor  less  than  if  he  had  said,  "•  And  all 
*'  the  Jewish  people."  So  that  his  manner  of  using  this  erm 
affords  no  foundation  for  the  distinction  that  was  long  after  his 
time  introduced  ;  no  more  than  the  general  argument  against 
the  encroachment  of  the  people,  or  of  the  pastors,  on  each 
other,  taken  from  the  rigid  observance  which  the  different 
classes,  under  the  Mosaic k  economy,  had  of  their  respective 
functions,  affords  a  foundation  (as  some  have  ridiculously 
urged)  for  concluaing  that  the  orders  in  the  christian  ministry, 
were  the  same  in  number  with  the  Jewish.  So  far  indeed  is 
Clement  from  giving  any  insinuation  of  this  kind,  that,  in  a 
passage  formerly  quoted,  he  expressly  mentions  the  christian 
orders  as  being  two,  and  as  having  been  clearly  and  bv  name 
predicted  in  the  prophetical  writings  of  the  Old  Testament. 

But  to  return  to  the  distinction  of  the  whole  church  into 
clergy  and  laity  ;  in  after  ages  they  even  improved  upon  their 
predecessors.  The  schoolmen  (a  modest  race,  all  clergymen) 
thought  it  was  doing  the  laymen  too  much  honour  to  derive 
the  name  from  XMi-  populus.  It  suited  their  notions  better 
to  deduce  it  from  xxxi,  lapis,  a  stone.  Take  for  a  specimen  a 
few  things  adi'anced  on  this  subject  bv  some  celebrated  doc- 
tors, as  quoted  by  Alteusfaig  in  his  Lexicon  Theologicum. 
"  Capitur  clericus  pro  viro  docto,  scientifico,  perito,  scientia 
*'  pleno,  repleto  et  experto.  K  contra  laicus  capitur  pro  viro 
*'  inciocto,  imperito,  insipiente  etlapicleo.  Unde  laicus  dicetur 
*'  a  A«:«£$,  Grsece,  quod  est  lapis  Latine.  Et  sic  omnis  clericus, 
*'  if  quantum  clericus,  est  laudabJlis  ;  laicus  vero,  in  quantum 
*'  laicas,  est  vituperandus.  Clerici  quoque  a  toto  genere  de 
*'jure  prseponuntur,  et  debent  pra^poni  laicis."  To  these -I 
shall  add    the  sentiments    of  cardinal  Bona,    in   relation   to 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  155 

the  care  that  ought  to  be  taken  by  the  clei^gy,  that  laymen  may 
not  be  allowed  to  do  themselves  harm  by  studying  the  pro- 
founder  parts  of  scripture,  which  their  stupidity  is  utterly  inca- 
pable of  comprehending.  He  kindly  mentions,  at  the  same 
time,  the  books  which  he  thinks  they  will  not  be  the  worse  for« 
and  which,  therefore,  they  may  be  permitted  to  peruse.  "  De 
''  laicis  in  quibus  mater  csecitatis  superbia  regnat,  quatenus  ad 
"  ea  qvae  -^unt  tidei  et  moram.  Cum  ehim  siciit  idiotse  presu- 
"  munt  sacnun  scripturam  exponere,  quae  est  profundissima 
"  omnium  scripturarum.  Cum  iterum  habeant  quandaiti  ho- 
"  nestatem  exteriorem,  contemnunt  vitam  omnium  aliorum, 
"  et  merito  hujus  duplicis  superbia  exeag'antur,  ut  incidant  in 
**  errorum  istum  pessimum,  per  quern  excaecantur  a  Deo,  ut 
"  nesciant  discernere  quid  bonum  est  et  quid  malum,  Quare 
*'  non  omnes  scripturse  libros  legant  laici.  Quoniam  nihil  est 
"  tam  sanctum  et  salubre  etpium  quo  nbn  contingat  abuti,  sic 
"  de  libris  evenit,  quorum  non  est  culpa,  neque  s'  ribentium, 
*'  sed  scoelus  est  in  abusu  :  non  tamen  arcendi  videntur  ab  op- 
"  usculis  moralibus  et  devotis,  nuUam  in  se  difiicultatem,  nee 
*'  ambiguicatem,  nee  absurditatem  in  translatione  gerentibus, 
"  cujusmodi  sunt  historiee,  vel  vits,  vel  legendse  sanctorum^ 
"  ijec  non  meditationes  sanctge."  How  condescending  is  the 
good  doctor  !  He  does  not  absolutely  prohibit  the  stupid  and 
conceited  generation  of  laAmen  from  reading  some  of  the  plain- 
er books  of  Scripture,  and  indulges  them  freely  in  what  is  bet- 
ter f(jr  them,  story-books  and  godly  meditations,  and  the  le-' 
gends  of  the  saints. 

I  shall  have  occasion  afterwards  to  trace  a  little  further  the 
iriost  material  changes,  to  which  those  above-mentioned,  as 
well  as  other  novel  nam^s  and  distinctions,  were  rendered 
subservient. 


156  LECTURES  ON 


LECTURE  X. 


1  HAVE  met  with  the  observation,  though  I  do  not  at  pre* 
sent  recollect  where,  that  the  world  is  ruled  by  names.  It 
matters  not  who  said  so  :  but  experience  shows  us,  that  there 
is  more  truth  in  the  remark  than  any  one,  at  first  hearing, 
would  be  apt  to  imagine.  When  names  are  first  assigned  to 
offices,  or  even  to  orders  of  men,  there  is  commonly  an  asso* 
ciation  of  ideas  favourable  or  unfavourable  in  some  respect  or 
other,  which  is  derived  from  the  more  ancient  to  the  more  re- 
cent application  of  the  term.  And  even  if  the  term  should  be 
coined  for  the  occasion,  the  materials  whence  it  is  taken,  that 
is,  the  known  etymology,  produces  the  same  effect.  It  inva- 
riably gives  rise  to  certain  associations  ;  these  influence  opi- 
nion, and  opinion  governs  practice.  We  have  seen  the  ten- 
dency, which  the  distinction  of  mankind  into  clergy  and  laity 
had  to  heighten,  in  the  minds  of  the  populace,  that  is,  more 
than  nine-te  jths  of  the  people,  the  reverence  for  the  sacred  or- 
der. The  effect  thus  actually  produced,  in  ignorant  ages, 
through  the  arrogance  of  the  one  side,  and  the  superstition  of 
the  other,  is  sufficiently  manifest,  and  perfectly  astonishing. 
I  shall  proceed  to  take  notice  of  the  consequences  of  some 
other  innovations  in  the  style  adopted  on  these  subjects. 

A  close  resemblance,  both  in  titles  and  functions,  to  the 
Jewish  priesthood,  came  soon  to  be  very  much  affected  by  the 
pastors  of  the  church.  The  very  names  of  high-priest,  priest, 
and  Levite,  which  the  inspired  writers  had  never  once  applied 
to  any  class  of  ministers,  ordinary  or  extraordinary,  in  the 
christian  commonwealth,  appeared  to  have  a  wonderful  fasci- 
nation in  them,  that  rendered  them  incomparably  superiour  to 
any  appellations  which  Jesus  Christ,  or  his  apostles,  had 
thought  fit  to  bestow.  Beside  the  fancied  dignity,  the  sacer- 
dotal titles  had  been  always  understood  to  convey  the  notion 
cf  certfiin  rights,  which  conduced  both  to  the  honour,  and  to 
the  emolument,  of  those  to  whom  these  titles  belonged.     Now 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  iSf 

having  availed  themselves  of  the  supposed  analogy,  they 
thought  thev  had  the  best  right  in  the  world  to  extend  their 
claims  mu<  h  further  ;  arguing,  that  because  the  bishops,  pres- 
byters, and  deacons,  were  the  high-priests,  priests,  and  Levites, 
of  a  superiour,  a  more  heavenly  and  spiritual  dispensation, 
they  ought  to  possess  more  of  the  unrighteous  mammon,  that 
is,  more  earthly  treasure,  and  greater  tem.poral  power.  And, 
what  is  still  more  extraordinary,  by  such  wretched  reasoning 
the  bulk  of  mankind  v/ere  convinced. 

It  is  worth  while  to  remark  the  great  difference  between  the 
style  adopted  by  the  apostles,  in  relation  to  all  sacred  matters, 
and  that  which,  in  the  course  of  a  few  ages,  crept  into  the 
church,  and  even  became  universal  in  it.  Under  the  Mosaick 
economy,  which  exacted  the  rigid  observance  of  a  burden- 
some ritual,  the  onl)'  place  devoted  to  the  ceremonial  and  tem- 
porary service,  consisting  in  sacrifices  and  oblations,  ablutions, 
aspersions,  and  perfumes,  was  the  temple  of  Jerusalem,  for  no 
where  else  could  the  publick  cremonies  be  lawfully  performed. 
The  places  that  were  dedicated  to  what  maybe  called  compa- 
ratively the  moral  and  unchangeable  part  of  the  service,  con- 
sisting in  prayers  and  thanksgivings,  and  instructive  lessons 
from  the  law  and  the  prophets,  were  the  synagogues,  which,  as 
they  were  under  no  limitation,  in  point  of  number,  time,  or 
place,  might  be  built  in  any  city,  or  village,  where  a  suitable 
congregation  of  worshippers  could  be  found ;  not  only  in 
Judea,  but  wherever  the  Jewish  nation  was  dispersed,  and  that 
even  though  their  temple  and  their  polity  should  subsist  no 
longer.  The  ceremonies  of  the  law  being  represented  in  the 
gospel  as  but  the  shadows  of  the  spiritual  good  things  dis- 
closed by  the  latter,  and  its  corporal  purifications,  and  other 
rites,  as  the  weak  and  beggarly  elements,  intended  to  serve  but 
for  a  time,  and  to  be  instrumental  in  ushering  a  more  divine 
and  rational  dispensation,  it  was  no  wonder  that  they  borrow- 
ed no  names  from  the  priesthood,  to  denote  the  christian  mi* 
nistry,  or  from  the  parade  of  the  temple-service  much  calcu- 
lated to  dazzle  the  senses,  to  express  the  simple  but  spiritual 
devotions  and  moral  instructions,  for  which  the  disciples  of 
Jesus  assembled  under  the  humble  roof  of  one  of  their  bre- 
thren. On  the  contrary,  in  the  name  they  gave  to  the  sacred 
offices,  as  well  as  to  other  things,  regarding  their  religious  ob- 
servances, they  showed  more  attention  to  the  service  of  the 
S)'nagogue,  as  in  every  respect  more  analogous  to  the  reasona- 
ble service  required  by  the  gospel.  The  place  where  they  met 
is  once,  James  ii.  2,  called  a  synagogue,  but  never  a  temple. 
"  If  there  come  into  your  assembly,"  e/5  ryv  a-wxye^nv  CfMiy.  And 
it  is  well  known,  that  the  names  teacher,  elder,  overseer,  at- 


158  LECTURES  ON 

tendant,  or  minister,  and  even  angel^  or  messenger,  of  the  coils 
gregation,  were,  in  relation  to  the  ministry  of  the  Jewish  syna- 
gogue, in  current  use. 

When  we  consider  this  frequent  recourse  to  terms  of  the 
one  kind,  and  this  uniform  avoidance  of  those  of  the  other; 
and  when  at  the  same  time  we  consider  how  much  the  sat  red 
writers  were  inured  to  all  the  names  relating  to  the  sacerdotal 
functions;  and  how  obvious  the  application  must  have  been, 
if  it  had  been  proper  ;  it  is  impossible  to  conceive  this  conduct 
as  arising  from  any  accidental  circumstance.  We  are  compel- 
led to  say  with  Grotius,  (De  imperio  sum.  Potest,  cap.  ii  5,) 
"  Non  de  nihilo  est,  quod  ab  eo  loquendi  gencre,  et  Christus 
"  ipse,  et  apostoli  semper  abstinuerunt."  It  is  indeed  most 
natural  to  conclude,  that  it  must  have  sprung  from  a  sense  of 
the  ansuitableness  of  such  an  use  to  this  divine  economy, 
which,  like  its  author,  ''  is  made  not  after  the  law  of  it  carnal 
"  commandment,  but  after  the  power  of  an  endless  liie."  I 
may  add,  it  must  have  sprung  from  a  conviction  that  such  an 
application  might  mislead  the  unwary  into  misapprehensions 
of  the  nature  of  the  evangelical  law. 

In  it  Jesus  Christ  is  represented  as  our  only  priest ;  and  as 
he  ever  liveth  to  make  intercession  for  us,  his  priesthood  is 
unchangeable,  untransmissive,  and  eternal.  A  priest  is  a  me- 
diator between  God  and  man.  Now  we  are  taught,  m  this 
divine  economy,  that  as  there  is  one  God,  there  is  one  mediator 
between  God  and  men,  the  man  Christ  Jesus.  The  unity  of 
the  mediatorship,  and  consequently  of  the  priesthood,  in  the 
strictest  sense  of  the  word,  is  as  realh/  an  article  of  our  reli* 
gion  as  the  unity  of  the  Godhead.  I  do  not  deny  that  in  a 
looser  sense  every  minister  of  religion  may  be  called  a  mediator, 
or,  if  you  please,  a  priest ;  inasmuch  as  he  is  the  mouth  of  the 
congregation,  in  presenting  their  prayers  to  God,  and  is,  as  it 
were,  also  the  mouth  of  God,  on  whose  part  he  admonishes 
the  people.  The  great  reason  against  innovating  by  the  intro- 
duction of  these  names  is,  not  because  the  names  are  in  no 
sense  applicable,  (that  is  not  pretended)  but  because  first,  they 
are  unnecessary  ;  secondly,  their  former  application  must  un- 
avoidably create  misapprehensions  concerning  the  nature  of 
the  evangelical  ministry;  and  thirdly,  because  the  inspired 
penmen  of  the  New  Testament,  who  best  understood  the 
nature  of  that  ministry,  never  did  apply  to  it  those  names. 
But  to  return,  the  only  proper  sacrifice,  under  the  ne\v  cove- 
nant, to  which  all  the  sacrifices  of  the  old  pointed,  and  in  which 
they  were  consummated,  is  the  death  of  Christ.  This,  as  it 
cannot,  like  the  legal  sacrifices,  be  repeated,  neither  requires 
Bor  admits  any  supplement.     "  For  by  one  offering  he  hath 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY,  1S9 

J>^  perfected  for  ever  them  that  are  sanctified."  Sometimes, 
iriticcd,  in  regard  lO  the  Mosaick  institution,  an  allegorical 
Style  IS  adopted,  wherein  all  christians  are  represented  as  priests, 
being,  as  it  were,  in  baptism,  consecrated  to  the  service  of 
God,  the  whole  community  as  a  holy  priesthood,  to  offer  up 
spiritual  sacrifices  to  him,  the  bodies  of  christians  as  temples 
de&lined  for  the  inhabitation  of  God  through  the  spirit.  The 
oblations  are  thanksgivings,  prayer,  and  praise.  The  same 
name  is  also  given  to  acts  of  beneficence  and  mercy.  "  To  do 
*'  good  and  to  communicate  forget  not,  for  with  sych  sacrifices 
"  God  is  well  pleased."  This  is  also  the  manner  of  the  ear- 
liest fathers.  Justin  Martyr,  in  his  dialogue  with  Trypho,  the 
Jew,  after  mentioning  Christ  as  our  all-sufficient  high-priest, 
insists,  that  in  consequence  of  our  christian  vocation,  we,  his 
dis-ipies,   not  the  pastors  exclusively,  are  God's  true  sacer- 

doud    family.       Hjtce/j     ot^^ts^oQiiio))      to     etAj)^-<vav     y£V05    fC-jM.EV    ']ii    Bsa. 

In  this  allusive  way,  also,  the  terms  circumcision,  passover, 
unleavened  bread,  altar,  sabbath,  and  the  like,  are  sometimes 
allegorically  applied  by  the  sacred  penmen.  But  no  where  are 
the  terms  high-priest,  priest,  or  Levite,  applied  peculiarly  to 
the  ministers  of  Christ, 

Doctor  Hickes,  a  zealous  asserter  of  what  he  calls  the  chris- 
tian priesthood,  has  a  wonderful  method  of  solving  this  diffi- 
culty. He  supposes,  that  Christ  and  his  apostles  acted  the 
politicians  in  this  particular.  According  to  him  they  were 
afraid,  that  with  all  the  miracles  and  supernatural  gifts  they 
could  boast,  it  was  an  imdertaking  too  bold  16  be  hazarded,  to 
appear  as  rivals  to  the  Jewish  priests.  Here  he  inadvertently 
ascribes  a  conduct  to  Jesus  Christ,  which,  in  my  apprehension, 
reflects  not  a  little  on  the  sincerity  of  that  spotless  character. 
*'  As  a  Jew,"  says  he,  (Let.  1,  chap.  iii.  §  1.)  "  he  was  to  ob- 
"  serve  the  law  and  the  temple  worship,  and  live  in  communion 
*'  with  the  Jews  ;  which,  though  he  could  do  as  a  king  and  a 
*'  prophet,  yet  he  could  not  do  it  with  congruitv,  had  he  declar- 
*'  ed  himself  to  be  their  sovereign  pontif,  that  very  high-priest, 
"  of  which  Aaron  himself  was  but  a  type  and  shadow."  But 
allow  me  to  ask.  Why  could  he  not  ?  Was  it  because  there  was 
a  real  incongruity  betwixt  his  conforming  to  the  Jewish  wor- 
ship, and  his  character  of  high-priest?  If  there  was,  he  acted 
incongruously,  for  he  did  conform  ;  and  all  he  attained  by  not 
declaring  himself  a  priest,  was  not  to  avoid,  but  to  dissem* 
ble,  this  incongruity.  And  if  there  was  none  in  conforming, 
where  was  the  incongruity  in  avowing  a  conduct  which  was  in 
itself  congruous  and  defensible  ?  We  are  therefore  forced  to 
conclude,  from  this  passage,  either  that  our  Lord  acted  incon- 
gruously, and  was  forced  to  recur  to  dissimulation  to  conceal 


160  LECTURES  ON 

it,  or  that  Doctor  Hi  ekes  argues  very  inconsequentially.  The 
true  christian  can  be  at  no  loss  to  determine  which  side  of  the 
alternative  he  ovight  to  adopt. 

But,  to  consider  a  little  the  hypothesis  itself,  the  apostles 
might  boldly,  it  seems,  and  without  such  offence  as  could  en- 
danger the  cause,  call  their  master  the  Messiah,  the  king,  (a 
name  with  the  Jews  above  every  other  human  title.)  They 
might,  in  this  respect,  say  safely,  that  though  their  chief  priests 
and  rulers  had  killed  the  Lord  of  life,  God  had  raised  him 
from  the  dead,  nay,  had  done  more,  had  exalted  him  to  his 
own  right  hand,  to  be  a  prince  and  a  saviour,  to  give  repent- 
ance to  the  people,  and  the  remission  of  sins.  I'hey  might 
thus  openly,  if  not  put  him  in  the  place  of  the  priest,  put  him 
in  the  place  of  the  Almighty,  to  whom  the  priests  arc  bound 
to  minister,  and  from  whom  ultimately  all  the  blessings  must 
be  obtained  ;  nay,  and  represent  his  power  as  more  extensive 
in  procuring  divine  forgiveness  and  favour,  (the  great  object 
of  all  their  sacrifices)  than  any  that  had  ever  been  experienced 
through  the  observance  of  the  Mosaick  rites  ;  inasmuch  as 
"  by  him  all  that  believe  are  justified  from  all  things,  from 
*'  which  they  could  not  be  justified  by  the  law  of  Moses." 
Yet,  says  the  doctor,  they  durst  not  call  him  priest.  Now  we 
know  that  the  usurping  of  this  title  was  not,  by  the  Jewish 
institute,  either  treason  or  blasphemy  ;  whereas,  the  titles  and 
attributes,  which  the  apostles  gave  their  master,  were  account- 
ed both  treasonable  and  blasphemous  by  the  unbelieving  Jews, 
and  with  too  much  appearance  of  truth,  if  Jesus,  had  been  the 
impostor  they  imagined  him  ;  for  the  disciples  set  him  in  their 
representations  above  every  thing  that  is  named,  either  in  the 
heaven,  or  upon  the  earth.  I  might  say  further,  Did  the  first 
preachers  hesitate  to  maintain  the  cause  of  their  master,  not- 
withstanding that  by  implication  it  charged  the  guilt  of  his 
blood  on  the  chief  priests  and  rulers,  as  those  rulers  themselves 
but  too  plainly  perceived  ?  But  why  do  1  say  by  implication  ? 
They  often  most  explicitly  charged  them  with  this  atrocious 
guilt.  It  was  in  the  midst  of  the  sanhedrim  that  Stephen  bold- 
ly said.  Which  of  the  prophets  have  not  your  Jaf  hers  persecuted  ? 
and  they  have  slain  them  who  showed  before  of  the  coming  of  the 
Just  one^  ofxohom  ye  have  been  noxo  the  betrayers  and  murderers^ 
Might  thev  thus  with  safety  to  the  cause,  at  least,  though  not 
with  impunity  to  their  persons,  exhibit  those  priests  as  homi- 
cides, parricides,  regicides,  and,  if  I  may  be  allowed  a  bold  ex- 
pression, even  deicides  ;  and  yet  durst  not,  without  involving 
the  whole  in  one  general  ruin,  so  much  as  insinuate  that  they 
also  had  their  priests  ?  Credat  Judscus  Apella, 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HIStORYi  i6i 

$--'^'!iti  shbrt,  the  whole  pretext  of  this  learned  doctor  is  precisely 
■'&s  if  one  should  say,  that  if  in  a  country  like  this,  for  instance, 
one  were  to  raise  a  rebellion  in  favour  of  a  pretender  to  the 
Ibrown^  the  partisans  might,  with  comparatively  little  danger 
Or  offence,  st\le  the  sovereign  in  possession  a  tyrant  aiid  usur- 
per, and  proclaim  the  man  they  would  set  up.  King  of  Great 
Britain,  France^  and  Ireland,  and  even  add.  Defender  of  the 
Faith.  But  it  would  be  imminently  hazardous,  and  would 
rJ^robably  ruin  the  cause,  to  insinuate  that  he  had  the  patronage 
bf  any  ecclesiastick  benefices.  They  may  with  safety  denomi- 
nate him  the  head  of  the  church,  and  of  the  law,  the  source  of 
all  honours  and  authority  in  the  state,  and  even  give  him 
higher  titles  than  ever  monarch  had  enjoyed  before  :  they  may 
assume  to  themselves  the  names  of  all  sorts  of  offices,  civil  or 
military,  under  him  ;  but  if  they  would  avoid  inevitable  per*- 
dition,  let  them  not  style  any  of  themselves  his  chaplainsi  In 
fact,  the  absurdity  here  is  not  equal  to  the  former. 

Let  it  not  be  imagined,  Gentlemen,  from  what  has  beeii  ad" 
vanced  above,  that  I  mean  to  contend  with  any  man  about 
words  and  names.  I  know  they  are  in  themselves  but  mere 
isounds,  and  things  indifferent.  And,  doubtless,  any  one 
sound  is  naturally  as  fit  to  serve  as  the  sign  of  any  idea  as  ano- 
ther. It  is  a  matter  of  no  moment  to  us,  at  present^  whether 
we  call  a  minister  of  religion,  bishop,  prelate,  presbyter,  priest, 
or  clergyman.  And  pertinaciously  to  refuse  the  use  of  the 
na^nes  which  custom,  the  arbiter  of  language^  has  authorize 
ed,  might  be  thought  to  savour  of  puritanical  fanaticism.  The 
allusion  they  plamiy  bore  at  first  is  now  scarcely  minded,  and 
their  etymology  ife,  in  regaM  to  most  people,  either  unknown 
or  forgotten.  But  in  deducing  the  train  of  changes  which,  in 
process  of  time,  was  effected  both  in  things  and  in  opinions,  it 
is  pertinent  to  take  notice  of  the  purpose  originailv  served  by 
the  introduction  of  such  novel  names  and  phrases,  as  those  on 
which  we  have  been  remarking  once  were,  as  well  aS  of  the 
Wieanings  originally  conveyed  by  them.  To  tauses  in  appear- 
ance the  most  trivial  often  effects  the  most  important  are  to 
be  ascribed. 

I  might  add  to  the  above  observations,  that  some  carried 
this  species  of  innovation  so  far  as  even,  one  would  think,  to 
envy  the  pagans  the  appellations  they  bestowed  on  the  mihi- 
isters  of  an  idolatrous  worship,  and  on  those  who  presided  in 
their  secret  and  abominable  rites.  The  learned  doctor  lately 
quoted,  though  a  sincere  christian  in  his  way,  possessed  much 
of  that  spirit,  and  seems  to  regret  exceedingly  that  we  have  no 
such  fine  words  and  high-sounding  titles  as  hierophant,  hiero- 
myst,  and  mystagogue.     It  was  the  same  spirit  that  prompted, 

X. 


162  LECTURES  ON 

in  the  pastors,  the  affectation  of  epithets,  added  to  their  names, 
expressive  of  their  virtues,  and  of  the  esteem  and  veneration 
of  those  that  approached  them,  such  as  most  holy,  most  bles- 
sed, most  religious,  most  worthy  of  God,  beloved  of  God,  re# 
verend,  venerable,  and  many  others,  which  it  were  tedious  to 
enumerate,  together  with  certain  ceremonies,  such  as  bowing 
the  head,  kissing  the  hands,  and  the  like.  Of  these  I  shall 
only  say,  that  though  some  of  them  became  afterwards,  as 
words  of  course,  mere  marks  of  civil  respect  for  the  office, 
they  were,  in  their  application  at  first,  entirely  personal.  If 
we  were  to  settle  a  sort  of  spiritual  barometer  for  determining 
the  precise  quantity  at  which  piety  and  virtue,  at  any  given 
time,  arrived  in  the  church,  I  could  not  assign  a  better  than 
the  use  of  these  epithets  and  ceremonies,  holding  it  as  an  in- 
variable canon,  that  in  proportion  as  the  external  signs  multi- 
plied, the  substance  of  internal  religion  decreased.  At  no 
time  could  the  pharisaical  scribes  be  accused  of  greater  osten- 
tation, or  more  desire  of  greetings  in  the  markets,  and  to  be 
called  of  men.  Rabbi,  Rabbi,  than  were,  a  few  ages  afterwards, 
the  ministers  of  the  humble  Jesus,  who  had  so  expressly  warn- 
ed his  followers  against  the  imitation  of  their  vain-glorious 
manners.  Yet  such  are  the  manners  which  even,  in  these  more 
enlightened  times,  the  priestly  pride  of  some  prelatical  preach- 
ers has  instigated  them  to  write  whole  volumes  to  revive. 

One  of  the  natural  consequences  of  all  those  great  distinc- 
tions of  the  sacred  order  was,  that  they  made  way  for  another, 
by  which  the  ministers  of  religion,  in  a  manner,  appropriated 
the  term  church  to  themselves.  I  have  had  occasion,  in  these 
lectures,  to  lay  before  you  the  only  undoubted  acceptations, 
wherein  I  find  the  word  eKK^a-ioc  employed  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  have  observed,  that  when  applied  to  the  disciples 
of  Christ,  it  always  denotes  either  the  whole  christian  com- 
munity, or  all  those  of  a  particular  congregation,  under  the 
guidance  of  their  own  pastors.  I  have  also  pointed  out  one 
deviation  from  the  latter  of  these  original  meanings  naturally 
consequent  on  the  change  that  in  a  few  centuries  ensued,  when 
the  bishop,  instead  of  the  oversight  of  one  congregation,  had 
the  superintendency  of  many  congregations,  that  is,  when  his 
one  congregation,  on  account  of  the  increase  of  proselytes,  was 
split  into  several,  and  when  the  habit  of  applying  the  word  in 
the  singular  number  to  the  whole  of  a  bishop's  charge  prevail- 
ed over  strict  propriety,  and  the  primitive  use  of  the  terra. 
This  prepared  men  for  a  still  farther  extension  of  the  name  to 
all  the  congregations  of  a  province  under  the  same  metropoli- 
tan, and  afterwards  to  all  those  of  a  civil  diocess  under  the 
same  patriarch  or  exarch. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  163 

I  now  intend  to  point  out  another  still  more  remarkable  de- 
viation not  from  the  latter,  as  those  now  mentioned  were,  but 
from  the  former  of  the  two  primitive  senses,  whereby  the 
word  is  applied  to  the  christian  commonwealth.  Then  it 
means,  as  is  pretended,  either  the  church  collective,  that  is,  the 
whole  community  of  christians,  or  the  church  representative, 
that  is,  say  some,  the  whole  clerical  orders,  say  others,  the 
church  judicatories,  especially  the  supreme.  And  this,  I  ac- 
knowledge, is  a  distinction  that  is  favoured  not  only  by  those  of 
the  Romish  communion,  but  by  most  sects  of  protestants  also. 
To  many,  however,  and  I  acknowledge  myself  one  of  the  num- 
ber, it  is  manifest,  that  it  is  no  less  a  novelty  than  the  former, 
having  no  foundation  in  the  scriptural  usage. 

The  Hebrew  word  Vnp  exactly  corresponds  to  the  Greek 
sKKXi}Ttx,  and  is  commonly  rendered  by  it  in  the  septuagint,  the 
only  Greek  translation  of  the  Old  Testament  in  use  in  the 
davs  of  our  Saviour.  Its  idiom  and  phraseology  was  conse- 
quently become  the  standard,  in  all  matters  that  concerned 
religion,  to  all  the  Jewish  writers  who  used  the  Greek  language, 
and  were  commonly  distinguished  by  the  name  of  Hellenists. 
From  them  the  term  was  originally  borrowed  by  the  penmen  of 
the  New  Testament.  From  their  manner  of  using  it,  there- 
fore, the  general  meanings  of  the  word  are  to  be  sought.  But 
though  the  phrases  h^'^Uf'>  hnp  Si  in  Hebrew,  and  ztxtx  » iKuXnc-tx, 
jc-peteh  in  Greek,  the  whole  church  of  Israel,  do  frequently 
occur  in  the  Old  Testament,  there  is  not  a  single  passage  in 
which  they  are  not  confessedly  equivalent  to  the  phrases  iM, 
b:i^Dr\V>''  ^nd  7S-0UI  T«  eS-ve?  lo-paisP^y  all  the  nation  of  Israel.  The 
same  may  be  said  of  the  phrases  o^nbj*  brh  and  d'hSn  ay, » £«- 
x>yi<rix.  B-ia  and  0  Astos  3-f»  the  church  of  God  and  the  people  of 
God.  A  distinction  between  these  would  have  been  pro- 
nounced by  them  inconceivable,  as  being  a  distinction  between 
the  church  and  its  constituent  members.  In  the  Latin  trans- 
lation, called  the  Vulgate,  the  date  of  which,  or  a  great  part  of 
which,  if  I  mistake  not,  is  about  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  cen- 
tury, the  Greek  word  is  commonly  retained,  having  been  long 
before  naturalized  among  christians.  Accordingly  they  ren- 
dered those  phrases  in  the  Old  Testament  omnis  ecclesia  Israel 
and  ecclesia  Dei. 

I  know  not  for  what  reason  our  English  translators  have 
never  admitted  the  word  church  into  their  version  of  the  Old 
Testament,  notwithstanding  the  frequent  use  they  have  made 
of  it  in  their  translation  of  the  New.  They  have  always 
rendered  the  Hebrew  word  above-mentioned  by  the  English 
words  congregation,  assembly,  or  some  synonymous  term.  I 
do  not  mean  to  say,t  tat    la  so  doing,  they  have  mistranslated 


164  LECTURES  ON 

the  word.  Either  of  these  English  names  is,  perhaps,  as  well 
adapted  to  express  the  sense  oi  the  Hebrew,  as  the  appellatives 
of  one  language  commonly  are  to  convey  the  ideas  suggested 
by  those  of  another.  But  these  English  words  were  altoge- 
ther as  fit  for  expressing  the  sense  of  the  word  eKicXni-iot,  in  the 
!Ntw  i  estament  as  of  the  word  bnjJ  in  the  Old,  the  former 
being  the  term  by  which  the  latter  had  been  rendered  almost 
uniformly  in  the  septuagint,  and  which  had  been  employed  as 
equivalent  by  all  the  Hellenist  Jews.  What  I  blame,  therefore, 
in  our  translators,  is  the  want  of  uniformity.  They  ought 
constantly  to  have  rendered  the  original  expression  either 
church  in  the  Old  Testament,  or  congregation  in  the  New. 
Terms  so  perfectly  coincident  in  signification,  as  those  Hebrew 
and  Greek  names  are,  ought  to  have  been  translated  by  the 
same  English  word.  There  is  one  advantage  at  least  resulting 
from  suih  an  attention  to  uniformity,  which  is  this,  that  if  the 
application  of  the  word  should,  in  a  few  passages,  be  dubious, 
a  comparison  with  the  other  passages  wherein, it  occurs,  ohcn, 
serves  entirely  to  remove  the  doubt.  They  are  the  more  inex- 
cusable, in  regard  to  the  present  instance,  t'lat  they  do  not  re- 
fu'^e  the  title  of  church  to  the  Israelitish  commonwealth,  when 
an  occasion  of  giving  it  occurs  in  the  New  Testanivent,  though 
they  would  take  no  occasion  in  the  Old.  Thus  they  have  ren- 
dered the  words  of  Stephen,  who  says,  speaking  of  Moses, 
Acts  vii.  .38,  '•'-  This  is  he  that  was  in  the  church  in  the  wilder- 
ness.        Ov](^  eg-iv  0  ytvofA-tvoi  ev  It)  ix.i<,Xr,Tict.  ev  %  Bfii/AM. 

But  in  the  use  neither  of  the  Greek  word  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, nor  of  the  correspondent  Hebrew  word  in  the  old,  do 
we  find  a  vestige  of  an  application  of  the  term  to  a  smaller 
part  of  the  communit)>  their  governours,  pastors,  or  priests, 
for  instance,  as  representing  the  whole.  'I'he  only  passage,  as 
far  as  I  can  learn,  that  has  been,  with  any  appearance  of  plau- 
sibilitv,  alleged  for  this  purpose,  is  Matt,  xviii.  17,  where  our 
Lord,  in  the  directions  he  gives  for  removing  offences  between 
brethren,  enjoins  the  party  offended, after  repeated  admonitions 
in  a  more  private  m  umer  have  proved  ineffectual,  to  relate 
the  whole  to  the  church,  uTt-e  r-^  e>t.>i.Xea-tec, j  and  it  is  added, 
"  li  he  neglect  to  bear  the  church,  let  him  be  to  thee  as  a  hea- 
*'  then  and  a  publican."  Now  I  ask  by  what  rule  of  sound 
criticism  can  we  arbitrarily  impose  here  on  the  word  churchy 
the  signification  of  church  representative,  a  signification  which 
we  do  not  find  it  bears  in  one  other  passage  of  scripture  ?  Tq 
affirm,  without  proof,  that  this  is  the  sense  of  it  here,  is  taking 
for  granted  the  very  point  in  question. 

But  Wit  have  more  than  merely  negative  evidence  that  the 
meaning  of  the  word  is  here,  as  in  other  places,  no  more  than 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  m 

congregation,  and  that  the  term  ought  to  have  been  rendered 
so.  Let  it  be  observed,  that  our  Lord  gave  these  directions 
during  the  subsistence  of  the  Mosaick  establishnaent ;  and  if 
we  'believe  that  he  spoke  intelligibly,  or  with  a  view  to  be  un- 
derstood, we  must  believe  also,  that  he  used  the  word  in  an 
acceptation  with  which  the  hearers  were  acqu'inted.  Dodwell 
himself  saw  the  propriety  of  this  rule  of  interpreting,  when  he 
said,*  "  It  very  much  confirms  me  in  my  reasonings,  when  I 
"  find  an  interpretation  of  the  scriptures  not  only  agreeable  to 
*'  the  words  of  the  scriptures,  but  agreeable  also  to  the  notions 
"  and  significations  of  words  then  received.  For  that  sense 
"  which  was  most  likely  to  be  then  understood  was,  in  all  like- 
*♦  lihood,  the  true  sense  intended  by  the  Holy  Ghost  himself. 
**  Otherwise  there  could  be  no  security  that  his  true  sense 
"  could  be  conveyed  to  future  ages,  if  they  had  been  them- 
"  selves  mistaken  in  it,  to  whose  understanding  the  Holy 
"  Ghost  was  then  particularly  concerned  to  accommodate  him- 
*'  self."  Now  all  the  then  known  acceptations,. as  I  showed 
before,  of  the  name  £Kx?^crix,  were  these  two,  the  whole  Jewish 
people,  and  a  particular  congregation.  The  scope  of  the  place 
sufficiently  shows  it  could  not  be  the  former  of  these  senses,  it 
must  therefore  be  the  latter.  What  further  confirms  this  inter- 
pretation is,  that  the  Jews  were  accustomed  to  call  those  assem- 
blies, which  met  together  for  worship  in  the  same  synagogue, 
by  this  appellation  ;  and  had,  if  we  may  believe  some  learned 
men  conversant  in  Jewish  antiquities,  a  rule  of  procedure 
similar  to  that  here  recommended,  which  our  Lord  adopted 
from  the  synagogue,  and  transplanted  into  his  church. 

Another  collateral  and  corroborative  evidence,  that  by  jxTfA,^ 
trtu,  is  here  meant  not  a  representative  body,  but  the  whole  of  a 
particular  congregation,  is  the  actual  usage  of  the  church  for 
the  first  three  hundred  years.  I  had  occasion  formerly  to  re- 
mark, that  as  far  down  as  Cyprian's  time,  which  was  the  mid- 
dle of  the  third  century,  when  the  power  of  the  people  was  in 
the  decline,  it  continued  to  be  the  practice,  that  nothing  in 
matters  of  scandal  and  censure  could  be  concluded  without  the 
consent  and  approval  of  the  congregation.  And  this,  as  it 
appears  to  have  been  pretty  uniform,  and  to  have  subsisted 
from  the  beginning,  is,  in  my  opinion,  the  best  commentary 
which  we,  at  this  distance,  can  obtain  on  the  passage. 

If  any  impartial  hearer  is  not  satisfied  on  this  point,  I  would 
recommend  it  to  him,  without  the  aid  of  any  commentator  on 
either  side  of  the  question,  but  with  the  help  of  proper  con- 
cordances, attentively  to  search  the  scriptures.     Let  him  exa- 

*  Distinction  between  soul  and  spirit,  &.C.,  §  7. 


166  LFXTUPvES  ON 

mine  every  passage  in  the  New  Testament  wherein  the  word 
we  render  church  is  to  be  found,  let  him  canvass  in  the  writings 
of  the  Old  Testanient  every  sentence  wherein  the  correspond- 
ent word  occurs,  let  him  acid  to  these  the  apocryphal  books 
received  by  the  romanists,  which,  as  they  were  either  originaLy 
written,  or  translated  by  Hellenists,  amongst  whom  the  term 
eicitXtiTix  was  in  frequent  use,  must  be  of  some  authority  in 
ascertaining  the  Jewish  acceptation  of  the  word;  and  if  he' 
find  a  single  passage,  wherein  it  clearly  means  either  the  priest* 
hood,  or  the  rulers  of  the  nation,  or  any  thing  that  can  be 
called  a  church  representative,  let  him  fairly  admit  the  distinc- 
tion as  scriptural  and  proper.  Otherwise  he  cannot  admit  it, 
in  a  consistency  with  any  just  ride  of  interpretation. 

I  observed,  in  a  preceding  lecture,  that  the  term  tK.x.Xr,9i»  is, 
in  some  passages,  applied  to  the  people,  exclusively  of  the 
pastors.  The  same  was  remarked  of  the  word  KXyipoi;-  (not  as 
though  these  terms  did  not  properly  comprehend  both,  but  be- 
cause, in  collectives,  the  name  of  a  whole  is  often  given  to  a 
great  majority)  but  I  have  not  discovered  one  passage  wherein 
either  tycy^Xn^tu^  or  xA^jpasi  is  applied  to  the  pastors,  exclusive- 
ly of  the  people.  The  notion,  therefore,  of  a  church  repre- 
sentative, how  commonly  soever  it  has  been  received,  is  a 
mere  usurper  of  later  date.  And  it  has  fared  here  as  it  some- 
times does  in  cases  of  usurpation,  the  original  proprietor 
comes,  though  gradually,  to  be  at  length  totally  dispossessed. 
Should  any  man  now  talk  of  the  powers  of  the  church,  and  of 
the  rights  of  churchmen,  would  the  hearers  apprehend,  that 
he  meant  the  powers  of  a  christian  congregation,  or  the  rights 
of  all  who  are  members  of  the  christian  community  ?  And  it 
they  should  come  to  learn  that  this  is  his  meaning,  would  they 
not  be  apt  to  say,  '  It  is  pity  that  this  man,  before  he  attempt 
*  to  speak  on  these  subjects,  does  not  learn  to  speak  intelligi- 
*■  bly,  by  conforming  to  the  current  use  of  the  language  V  It 
is  therefore  not  without  reason  that  I  affirm,  that  the  more 
modern  acceptation,  though  an  entruder,  has  jostled  out  the 
rightful  and  primitive  one  almost  intirely.  But  as  every  man, 
•who  would  be  understood,  is  under  a  necessity  of  employing 
words  according  to  the  general  use  of  the  time  present, 

Quern  penes  arbilrium  es:,  et  jus,  et  norma  loquer.di  ; 

when  I  employ,  for  the  future,  any  of  the  words  affected  by 
this  remark,  I  am  always,  unless  where  the  connexion  indi- 
cates the  contrar}',  to  be  understood  as  using  them  in  the  sense 
in  which  they  are  now  commonly  received.  Only  by  the  de- 
duction that  has  been  given  of  the  origin  of  this  change,  we 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  IGf 

may  perceive,  that  from  what  is  said  in  relation  to  the  church 
in  scripture,  nothing  can  justly  be  concluded  in  support  of 
church-authority,  or  the  privileges  of  churchmen,  in  the  sense 
which  these  terms  generally  have  at  presents 

The  distinction  just  now  taken  notice  of,  in  concurrence 
with  the  interferences  between  the  civil  magistrate  and  the 
minister  of  religion,  or  between  the  spiritual  tribunals  (as 
they  were  called)  and  the  secular,  gave  rise  to  another  dis- 
tinction in  the  christian  community  between  church  and  state. 
When  thegospel  was  first  published  by  the  apostles,  andtheapos- 
tolick  men  that  came  after  them,  it  was  natural  and  necessary 
to  distinguish  believers  from  infidels,  living  in  the  same  coun- 
try, and  under  the  same  civil  governours.  The  distinction 
between  a  christian  church  or  society,  and  a  Jewish  or  an  ido- 
latrous state,  was  perfectly  intelligible.  But  to  distinguish 
the  church  from  its  own  members,  those  duly  received  into  it 
by  baptism,  and  continuing  in  the  profession  of  the  faith,  we 
may  venture  to  affirm,  would  have  been  considered  then  as  a 
mere  refinement,  a  sort  of  metaphysical  abstraction*  For 
where  can  the  difference  lie,  when  every  member  of  the  state 
is  a  member  of  the  church,  and  conversely,  every  member  of 
the  church  is  a  member  of  the  state  ?  Accordingly,  no  suck 
distinction  ever  obtained  among  the  Jews,  nor  was  there  any 
thing  similar  to  it  in  any  nation  before  the  establishment  of  the 
christian  religion  under  Constantine. 

But  what  hath  since  given  real  significance  to  the  distinc* 
tion  lis,  in  the  first  place,  the  limitation  of  the  term  church  to 
the  clergy  and  the  ecclesiastical  judicatories,  and,  in  the  se- 
cond place,  the  claims  of  independency  advanced  by  these, 
as  well  as  certain  claims  of  power  and  jurisdiction,  in  some 
things  differing,  and  in  some  things  interfering  with  the  claims 
of  the  magistrate.  For  however  much  connected  the  civil 
powers  and  church-governours  are  in  christian  states,  still 
they  are  distinct  bodies  of  men,  and,  in  some  respects,  inde- 
pendent. Their  very  connexion  will  conduce  to  render  them 
rival  powers,  and  if  so,  confederate  against  each  other. 
When  this  came  actually  to  be  the  case,  considering  the  cha- 
racter and  circumstances  of  the  times,  it  will  not  be  matter 
of  great  astonishment,  that  every  thing  contributed  to  give 
success  to  the  encroachments  of  the  latter  upon  the  former. 

Thomas  Becket,  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  once  wrote  t» 

the  empress  Matilda,  mother  of  Henry  II.  king  of  England, 

in  these  words  :  *•'  God  has  drcnvn  his  borv,  and  will  speedily  shoot 

from  thence   the  arroxvs  of  deaths  if  princes  do  not  permit  his 

'  spoils e^  the  churchy  for  the  love  of  xvhoin  he  had  deigned  to  die^ 


168  LECTURES  ON 

to  remain  free^  and  to  he  honoured  with  the  possession  of  thosS 
privileges  and  dignities^  which  he  had  purchased  for  her  with 
his  blood  on  the  cross.^^  "  Whoever  has  read  the  gospel,"  says 
the  noble  historian*,  "  must  be  astonished  to  hear,  that  an  ex- 
"  emption  tor  clergymen  from  all  civil  justice  was  one  of  the 
"  privileges  purchased  by  the  blood  of  Christ  for  his  church." 
He  might  have  said  further,  must  be  astonished  to  hear,  as 
the  words  manifestly  imply,  that  the  church,  the  spouse  of 
Jesus  Christ,  for  the  love  of  whom  he  died,  is  no  other  than 
the  clergy,  and  tha|  the  heavenly  blessings,  (for  that  his  king- 
dom was  not  of  this  world  he  himself  plainly  declared)  which 
were  the  price  of  his  blood,  were,  secular  dominion,  earthly 
treasure,  and  an  unlimited  licence  in  the  commission  of  crimes 
with  impunity.  It  is  not  easy  to  conceive  a  grosser  perver- 
sion of  the  nature,  design,  and  spirit  of  the  gospel.  Yet  by 
means  of  the  artful  appropriation  of  some  names,  the  word 
church  in  particular,  and  misapplication  of  others,  such  ab- 
surdities were  propagated  by  one  side,  and  believed  by  the 
other.  Nay,  the  frequency  of  the  abuse  is  acknowledged, 
even  by  such  Roman  catholick  authors  as  can  make  any  preten- 
sion to  discernment  and  candour,  Fleury,  the  ecclesiastical 
historian,  has  pointed  out  the  perversion  of  the  term  church 
in  more  places  than  one.  "  Peter  de  Blols,"  he  tells  us, 
"  warmly  recommended  to  the  bishop  of  Orleans,  to  remon- 
"  strate  with  his  cousin  king  Philip,  and  warn  him  against  lay- 
*'  ing  any  subsidies  whatever  upon  the  clergy,  in  support  of 
*'  the  war,  even  though  a  holy  war,  for  extending  the  domini- 
**  ons  of  the  church  ;  as  nothing,  he  affirms,  should  be  exact- 
*'  ed  from  the  clergy  but  prav  ers,  of  which  the  laitv  stand 
."  greatly  in  need."  Further,  he  acquaints  us,  that  this  zea- 
lous man  wrote  also  to  John  of  Coutances,  whom  he  exhorted 
to  employ  his  credit  with  the  king  of  England,  to  maintain 
the  dignity  of  the  church.  "  She  is  free,"  says  he,  "  by  the 
"  libefrty  which  Jesus  Christ  has  procured  us,  but  to  load  her 
**  with  exactions,  is  to  bring  her  into  bondage  like  Hagar.  If 
"  your  princes,  under  pretence  of  this  new  pilgrimage,  will 
"  render  the  church  tributary,  every  son  of  the  charch  ought 
"  to  resist,  and  die,  rather  than  submit  to  servitude."  The 
historian  pertinently  subjoinsf ,  *'  We  see  here  the  equivocal 
*'  use  made  in  those  days  of  the  words  church  and  liberty  ;  as 

*  Lord  Littleton. 

+  On  voit  ici  les  equivoques  <^rdinaires  en  ce  terns  ia  sur  les  mots  d'Eglise  et  de 
Libert^ ;  comme  si  I'Egl^ae  delivree  par  Jt-sus  Christ  n'eroit  que  le  clerge,  ou  qu'il 
nous  eut  delivrez  d'autre  chose  que  du  peche  et  des  ceremonies  iegales,  L.  Ixxiv,  ch. 
XV.     L.  Ixxxix,  ch.  cxJiv. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  169 

"  If  the  churcli  delivered  by  Jesus  Christ  were  only  the  clergy, 
''  or  as  if  our  deliverance  were  from  aught  but  sin  and  the  le- 
"  gal  ceremonies."  Again,  from  the  sas-ne  hand,  we  are  in- 
formed, that,  in  reply  to  a  letter  from  pope  Boniface  viii, 
wherein,  by  the  same  perversion  of  words,  the  pontilT  had 
appropriated  the  title  church  to  ecclesiasticks,  king  Philip  of 
France,  amongst  other  things,  wrote  to  him,  "■  The  church, 
*'  the  spouse  of  Jesus  Christ,  does  not  consist  of  clergy  only, 
*'  but  of  laymen  also.  He  has  delivered  it  from  the  slavery 
"  of  sin,  and  the  yoke  of  the  old  law,  and  has  willed,  that  all 
*'  who  compose  it,  both  clerks  and  laics,  enjoy  this  freedom. 
"  It  was  not  for  ecclesiasticks  only  that  he  died,  nor  to  them 
"  alone  that  he  pi-omised  grace  in  this  life,  and  glorj'  in  the 
"  next.  It  is  but  by  an  abuse  of  language  that  the  clergy  arro- 
"  gate  peculiarly  to  themselves  the  liberty,  which  Jesus  Christ 
"  has  purchased  for  us."  Which  of  the  two,  the  king  or  the 
priest,  was  the  greater  statesman,  I  know  not,  but  it  does  not 
require  a  moment's  hesitation  to  pronounce,  which  was  the 
better  divine.  The  inferiority  of  his  holiness  here,  even  in 
his  own  profession,  compared  with  his  majesty,  in  a  profession 
not  his  own,  is  both  immense  and  manifest. 

But  amongst  a  rude  and  ignorant  people,  in  ages  of  barbarity 
and  superstition,  it  was  easy  to  confound,  in  their  minds,  the 
cause  of  the  priest  with  the  cause  of  God,  in  every  quarrel 
which  the  former  happened  to  have  with  the  magistrate.  I 
shall  here  remark  in  passing,  and  with  it  conclude  the  present 
discourse,  that  it  is  doubtful  whether  the  word  iy.y.Xnis-ioi  ever 
occurs  in  the  New  Testament  in  a  sense,  wherein  the  word 
church  is  very  common  with  us,  as  a  name  for  the  place  of 
worship.  There  are  only  two  passages,  that  I  remember, 
which  seem  to  convey  this  sense.  They  are  both  in  the  ele- 
venth chapter  of  the  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  The  first 
is,  verse  18th,  When  ye  come  together  in  the  churchy  c-vi^yjf.>^am 
vfA^m  aln  iK-KXTiTioi..  Here,  however,  the  word  is  susceptible  of 
another  interpretation,  as  a  name  for  the  society.  i'hus  we 
say,  "The  lords  spiritual  and  temporal,  and  the  commons,  in 
"  parliament  assembled,"  where  parliaiTient  does  not  mean 
the  house  they  meet  in,  but  the  assembly  properly  constituted. 
The  other  is  verse  22d,  Have  ye  not  houses  to  eat  and  drink 
in^  or  despise  ye  the  church  of  God  ?  rs^s  sy.y.Xi]rnx,i  r^  B-is  ^ccclaQfoufli : 
where,  it  is  urged,  the  opposition  oi  ty.y.M'^i.A  tu  oix./**,  the 
church  to  their  houses,  adds  a  probability  to  this  inierpreui- 
tion.  But  this  plea,  though  plausible,  is  not  decisive.  The 
sacred  writers  are  not  always  studious  of  so  much  accuracy  in 
their  contrasts,  nor  is  it  here  necessary  to  the  sense.  The 
apostle's   argument   on  my   hypothesis  stands  thus:     What 

Y 


i7Q  LECTURES  ON 

can  be  the  reason  of  this  abuse  ?  Is  it  because  you  have  nat 
houses  of  your  own  to  eat  and  drink  in  ?  Or  is  it  because  you 
despise  the  christian  congregation  to  which  you  belong  ?  This, 
though  it  do  not  convey  so  exact  a  verbal  antithesis,  is,  in 
jny  judgment,  more  in  the  spirit  and  style  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, than  to  speak  of  despising  stone  walls.  But  as  to  this 
I  affirm  nothing.  To  express  the  place  of  meeting,  we  find  the 
word  crx^vaywyj},  as  observed  above,  used  by  the  apostle  James. 
In  ancient  authors,  the  words  first  adopted  were  oucXi^a-icisyiptoi^ 
fKKXisTtoK  afjtfls^  and  xvp'*'^",  whence  the  words  kirk  and  church. 
At  length  the  term  sx.y-M<noc,^  by  a  common  metonymy,  the  thing 
contained  for  the  thing  containing,  came  to  be  universally  em- 
plpyed  in  this  acceptation. 


£GCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY,  in 


LECTURE  Xi, 


J.  HE  steps  I  have  already  mentioned  and  explained,  ad^ 
vancing  from  presbytery  to  parochial  episcopacy,  thence  to 
prelacy  or  diocesan  episcopacy,  from  that  to  metropolitical 
primacy,  and  thence  again  to  patriarchal  superintendency^ 
together  with  those  methods  I  have  pointed  but  to  you,  where- 
by the  ministers  of  religion  distinguished  themselves  from 
their  christian  brethren,  insensibly  prepared  the  minds  of  the 
people  for  the  notion,  that  in  ordination  there  was  something 
exceedingly  mysterious,  and  even  inscrutable.  It  came  at 
length  not  to  be  considered  as  a  soleinn  manner  of  appointiiig 
a  fit  person  to  discharge  the  duties  of  the  pastoral  office 
aniongst  a  particular  flock  or  congregation,  and  of  committing 
them  to  his  care  ;  but  to  be  regarded  more  especially  as  the 
imprinting  of  a  certain  character,  or  uhperceivable  and  inc6ra= 
prehensible  signature  on  a  person,  a  character  which,  though  iii 
consequence  of  human  means  employed  by  the  proper  mirii^~ 
ter  it  was  conferred,  could  by  no  power  less  than  omnipotence 
be  removed.  And  though  at  first  hearing,  One  would  be  apt 
to  imagine,  that  by  this  tenet  they  derogated  as  much  fronl  the 
ecclesiastick  power  on  one  hand,  as  they  enhanced  it  on  th6 
other,  since  they  maintained,  that  the  persons  who  gave  this 
character,  could  not  take  it  away,  the  effect  on  men's  concept 
tions  was  very  different.  If  a  single  ceremony,  or  forni  of 
words,  could  with  as  much  facility  withdraw  as  confer  a  gift 
in  its  nature  invisible,  nobody  would  be  impressed  with  the 
conception,  that  any  thing  very  wonderful  had  been  either 
<iven  or  taken.  The  words  or  ceremony  of  ordaining  would 
e  considered  as  nothing  more  than  the  established  mode  oi 
nvesting  a  man  with  the  right  of  exercising  cai^onically  the 
icred  function  5  and  the  \vords  or  ceremony  used  in  the  depo-- 
;  tion,  as  the  mode  of  stripping  him  of  that  right,  or  privilege, 
.  o  that  he  should  ho  longer  oe  entitled  to  exercise  it.  In  this 
^  ay  he  would  be  under  the  same  canonical  incapacity  he  lay 
1  ider  before  his  ordination,  which  answers  to  what  was  foi: 
i   any  ages  calWd  in  the  church,  reducing  a  clergyman  to  lay- 


172  LECTURES  ON 

communion.  There  would  be  nothing  more  extraordinary 
here,  than  the  creating  of  a  lord  high  steward,  for  instance, 
by  certain  solemnities  accompanying' the  delivery  of  a  white 
batoon  into  his  hands,  and  placing  him  on  an  eminent  seat,  and 
his  putting  an  end  to  his  office,  by  publickly  breaking  the 
batoon,  and  coming  down  from  his  seat.  Whereas  for  a  man 
to  do  a  thing,  which  nothing  less  than  omnipotence  can  undo, 
and  which  even  that  in  fact  will  never  be  employed  in  undo- 
ing, to  imprint  a  character,  a  something  which  in  spite  of 
angels,  men,  and  devils,  shall,  to  eternity,  remain  indelible, 
appears  the  result  of  a  power,  inconceivable  indeed,  and  little 
less  than  divine. 

Whence  ideas  of  this  kind  originated,  ideas  that  do  not 
seem  to  quadrate  with  the  so  much  boasted  power  of  the 
keys,  which  implies,  alike,  that  of  opening,  and  that  of  shut- 
ting, admitting  and  excluding,  binding  and  loosing  ;  ideas,  of 
which  the  apostles  and  evangelists  have  no  where  given  us 
the  slightest  hint,  and  of  which  it  is  plain  they  had  not  them- 
selves the  smallest  apprehension,  is  a  matter  of  curious  in- 
quiry, and  closely  connected  with  the  subject  of  the  hierarchy. 
I  shall  therefore  endeavour  briefly  (in  this  lecture)  to  trace 
the  rise  and  progress  of  so  strange  a  doctrine. 

Ecclesiastical  degrees  were  not  instituted  originally  under 
the  notion  of  dignities,  pre-eminencies,  or  honours,  as  they 
became  afterwards,  but  as  ministries,  charges,  and  what  the 
apostle  Paul  called  cpyx,  works,  1  Tim.  iii,  1.  "  If  a  man  desire 
the  office  of  a  bishop,"  says  he,  "  he  desireth  a  good  work." 
Consequently  if,  in  any  thing  denominated  the  office  of  a 
bishop,  there  be  no  work  to  do,  it  cannot  be  the  office  whereof^ 
the  apostle  speaks  ;  for  the  misapplication  of  the  name  can 
never  alter  the  nature  of  the  thing.  The  persons  accordingly 
possessed  of  such  offices  were  styled,  both  by  our  Loi-d  and 
by  Paul  his  apostle,  spyulxt  labourers,  workmen.  "  The  labourers 
are  few,"  says  the  former,  "  and  the  workman  is  worthy  of 
*'  his  meat."  The  latter  recommends  it  to  Timothy  to  acquit 
himself  as  "  a  workman  that  needeth  not  be  ashamed." 

For  some  time,  indeed,  it  could  hardly  enter  into  the  mind 
of  any  man,  to  think  himself  entitled  to  decline  executing 
personally,  whilst  able  to  execute,  a  trust  solemnl}^  committed 
to  him,  and  which  he  had  himself  undertaken.  For  the  terms 
ordination  and  appcintnient  to  a  particular  pastoral  charge  were 
perfectly  synonymous.  If  one,  however,  in  those  truly  pri- 
mitive times,  (which  but  rarely  hapijened)  found  it  necessary 
to  retire  from  the  work,  he  never  thought  of  retaining  either 
the  title,  or  the  emoluments.  And  though  the  ministers  were 
of  two   kinds,  the   one  X-alled   anciently  the  ministry  of  the 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  173 

word,  and,  in  later  times,  the  cure  of  souls,  and  the  other  a 
ministry  in  things  temporal,  for  the  support  and  relief  of  the 
poor  and  infirm,  as  was  the  deaconship,  those  in  both  offices 
were  equally  held  bound  to  personal  service.  Nor  would  any 
one  have  thought,  in  the  earliest  ages,  of  serving  by  a  deputy, 
unless  for  a  short  time,  and  on  account  of  some  remarkable 
and  unavoidable  impediment ;  much  less  would  he  have  ac- 
cepted another  charge  that  was  incompatible  with  his  former 
one.  But  to  be  made  a  bishop,  and  in  being  so  to  receive  no 
charge  whatever,  to  have  no  work  to  execute,  could  have  been 
regarded  no  otherwise  than  as  a  contradiction  in  terms. 

Indeed,  the  name  of  the  office  implied ^he  service,  without 
which  it  could  not  subsist,  that  is,  withotfrwhich  there  was  no 
office.  The  name  bishop,  as  I  have  observed,  means  overseer, 
and  this  is  a  term  manifestly  correlative  to  that  which  ex- 
presses the  thing  to  be  overseen.  The  connexion  is  equally 
necessary  and  essential  as  between  father  and  child,  sovereign 
and  subject,  husband  and  wife.  The  one  is  inconceivable 
without  the  other.  You  cannot  make  a  man  an  overseer  to 
whom  you  give  no  oversight,  no  more  than  you  can  make  a  man 
a  shepherd,  to  whom  you  give  the  charge  of  no  sheep,  or  a 
husband  to  whom  you  give  no  wife.  Nay,  in  fact,  as  a  maa 
ceases  to  be  a  husband,  the  moment  that  he  ceases  to  have  a 
wife,  and  is  no  longer  a  shepherd  than  he  has  the  care  of 
sheep,  so  in  the  only  proper  and  original  import  of  the  words, 
a  bishop  continues  a  bishop  only  whilst  he  continues  to  have 
people  under  his  spiritual  care.  These  things,  indeed,  are  so 
plain,  that  one  is  almost  ashamed  to  attempt  to  illustrate 
them.  Yet  the  changes  that  too  soon  ensued,  have  turned 
matters  so  entirely  off  their  original  bottom,  that  propositions 
which,  in  the  age  of  the  apostles,  must  have  appeared  self-evi- 
dent, require  a  careful  development  to  us  moderns  ;  so  much 
is  the  import  of  names  and  phrases  altered  in  the  course  of 
some  successive  centuries.  Let  us  therefore  endeavour  to 
investigate  the  source  of  these  alterations. 

When,  as  it  happened  in  a  few  ages,  the  church  was  become 
populous  and  extensive;  and  when  released  from  persecution, 
it  was  "beginning  to  taste  the  sweets  of  ease  and  affluence  ; 
when  men,  by  consequence,  were  growing  less  zealous  and 
more  remiss  ;  as  the  several  congregations  were  supplied  by 
their  respective  presbyteries,  which  were  a  sort  of  colleges  of 
ministers,  who  under  the  bishop  had  the  charge  in  common  j 
it  happened  sometimes  that  one  of  these,  without  creating 
great  inconvenience  to  his  colleagues,  retired  from  the  service, 
and  either  for  the  sake  of  study  and  improvement,  or  from 
some  other  reason,  resided  elsewhere.  The  presbyters  had 
not  then  separate  charges,  and  the  consistory  could  sufficiently 


lU  LECTURES  ON 

supply  the  necessary  functions  with  one  more  or  one  fewefe 
But  he,  who  in  this  manner  retired  from  the  parish,  did  not 
retain  any  charge  of  the  people  j  as  little  did  he  draw  thence 
?jny  emolument  whateveri.  Thus  Jerom,  a  presbyter  of  An- 
tioch^  Ruffinus,  in  like  manner,  of  Aquileia,  and  Paulinus  of 
Barcelona,  resided  little  in  those  places^ 

Afterwards,  as  evil  customs  always  spring  from  small  begin- 
nings, the  number  of  such  absentees  daily  increasing,  this  de- 
generated into  a  very  gross  abuse  ;  and  those  nominal  pastors 
having  become  odious,  on  account  of  their  idle  way  of  living, 
got  the  name  of  vagabond  clerks^  of  whom  frequent  mention 
is  made  in  the  laws  and  novels  of  Justinian,  But  before  the 
commencement  of  the  sixth  century,  none  ever  thought  of 
holding  the  title,  and  enjoying  the  profits  of  an  office,  without 
serving.  Then,  indeed,  in  the  western  church,  the  condition 
of  ecclesiastical  ministries  underwent  a  considerable  change^ 
and  came  to  be  regarded  as  degrees  of  dignities,  and  honours, 
and  rewards  of  past  services.  As  formerly,  in  ecclesiastick 
promotions,  the  need  of  a  particular  church  being  considered, 
a  person  fit  for  the  charge  was  provided,  so  now  the  rule  was 
inverted,  and  the  condition  and  rank  of  the  person  being  con- 
sidered, a  degree,  dignity,  or  benefice,  was  provided,  which 
suited  his  quality  and  expectations,  whence  sprang  very  na- 
turally the  custom  of  doing  the  work  by  a  delegate.  And  as 
one  abuse  commonly  ushers  in  another,  the  assistance,  the 
presence,  nay,  the  residence  of  the  principal,  came  also  gra- 
dually to  be  dispensed  with.  Indeed,  when  the  man  is  not 
chosen,  because  fit  for  the  charge,  but  when  the  charge  is 
chosen,  or  (to  speak  more  properly)  when  the  rank,  the  titles, 
and  the  revenues  are  chosen  as  convenient  for  the  man,  things 
must  inevitably  take  that  course.  The  primitive  view  is  totally 
reversed.  The  man's  accommodation  is  then  become  the  pri- 
mary  object,  the  people's  accommodation,  if  an  object  at  all,  is 
but  the  secondary  at  the  most*  That  is  the  end,  this  is  only 
the  means. 

In  process  of  time,  this  became  so  frequent  in  some  t)lacds^ 
and  particularly  in  some  of  the  richest  diocesses,  and  parishes, 
wherein,  for  several  successions,  the  residence  of  the  occupant 
had  been  dispensed  with,  that  through  the  gradual,  but  sure 
operation  of  custom,  he  came  to  be  considered  as  not  obliged 
to  perform  any  pastoral  function,  or  so  much  as  to  reside 
among  the  people,  of  whom  he  was  denominated  the  pastor, 
and  from  whom  he  drew  a  considerable  stipend,  or  revenue. 
The  apostle's  maxim  was  a  maxim  no  longer.  "If  a  man 
*'  desire  the  office  of  a  bishop,  he  desireth  a  good  work." 
Many  then  desired  the  office  of  a  bishop,  if  without  absurdity 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY,  17S 

^e  can  say  so,  who  desired  no  work  at  all,  good  or  bad,  and 
they  desired  it  for  that  very  reason,  because  they  chose  to  be 
idle.  Indeed,  it  must  be  owned,  the  term  I'^iFKOTrt!  charge,  over- 
sight, vised  by  the  apostle,  necessarily  implies  work.  These 
two  are  indistinguishable.  But  in  the  times  we  now  speak  of, 
men  were  become  much  more  refined  than  the  apostles,  both 
in  distinguishing  and  in  separating.  First  sprang  the  distinc- 
tion, then  the  separation  of  the  order  from  the  ojice.  Hence 
arose  the  odious  distinction  of  benefices  with  residence,  and 
benefices  without  residence.  Of  much  the  same  import  is  the 
distinction  of  benefices  cum  euro.,  and  those  sine  cura  anima- 
mm  ;  from  the  last  of  which  comes  the  English  name  sinecure. 
This  corruption  in  practice  was  followed  by  the  absurdity  in 
doctrine,  which  some  did  not  blush  to  maintain,  that  one 
might  acquire  an  ecclesiastical  title  and  salary,  without  coming 
under  any  obligation.  The  absurdity  here  was  the  more 
glaring,  that  it  had  been  an  old  and  established  maxim  of  the 
canonists,  "  beneficium  datur  propter  officium."  The  benefice 
is  given  f6r  the  office.  In  order,  however,  to  palliate,  though 
ineffectually,  their  contrj^dicting  a  maxim  so  reasonable,  and 
so  universally  approved,  they  explained  the  office  to  mean  his 
reading  the  horary  prayers  of  the  breviary ;  so  that  for  once 
taking  into  his  hand  the  breviary,  and  reading  the  prayers  in 
publick,  in  a  muttering  voice,  as  quick  as  his  tongue  .was  able  tp 
utter  them,  which  they  explain  to  be  doing  the  office,  (for  thus 
the  best  laws  are  eluded)  he  was  entitled  to  a  yearly  rent  of,  per- 
haps, ten  thousand  crowns.  There  is  a  practice  in  England, 
when  a  man  is  presented  to  a  rectory,  which  is  there  called 
reading  himself  in,  that  has  but  too  clqse  an  affinity  to  the 
former. 

But  this  was  not  all ;  there  came  insensibly  into  use,  probably 
through  the  influence  of  such  examples  as  thqse  of  Jerom  and 
Paulinus  above-mentioned,  what  was  called  loose  or  absolute 
ordination,  wherein  a  man  received  the  degree  of  presbyter, 
though  of  no  particular  church,  and  equall|^  without  a  be- 
nefice, and  without  a  charge.  Some  time  ifter,  for  things 
always  advance  from  less  to  greater,  the  qegree  of  bishop 
yras  conferred  in  the  same  manner.  Thi^  may  be  said, 
in  some  respect,  to  be  much  more  pardonably  than  the  former 
abuse,  because  here,  if  there  was  no  office  or  duty  required, 
there  was  no  benefice  given.  Nothing,  hcwever,  could  be 
more  repugnant  both  to  primitive  practice,  and  to  the  only  mean- 
ing which  the  word  originally  bore.  To  ordgin  a  man  was  no- 
thing else  but,  in  a  solemn  manner,  to  assign  him  a  pastoral 
charge.  To  give  him  no  charge,  and  not  to  d^rdain  him,  were 
perfectly  identical.  It  has  been  urged  in  support  of  these  hono- 
rary degrees,  that  a  bishop  is  not  so  much  to  be   considered 


i7Q  LECTURES  ON 

under  the  notion  of  the  pastor  of  a  particular  church  or  congre» 
gation  as  under  the  notion  of  a  catholick  bishop,  or  pastor  of 
the  universal  church  ;  that  this  last  being  the  more  important 
relation,  ought  to  be  regarded  as  the  principal.  But  I  beg  ta 
know  what  we  are  to  understand  by  the  term  catholick^  or  uni- 
versal bishop.  In  the  strictest  acceptation,  it  is  applicable  only  to 
the  apostles,  as  I  had  occasion  formerly  to  observe.  Nor  was 
the  title  in  that  sense,  after  their  time,  assumed  by  any,  till  in 
the  decline  of  all  rational  religion  and  useful  knowledge,  it 
was,  to  the  great  scandal  of  the  better  part  of  christians,  arro- 
gated first  by  the  bishop  of  Constantinople,  and  afterwards  by 
the  bishop  of  Rome.  But  though  it  may  be  allowed,  that  in  a 
looser  sense  every  bishop  may  be  styled  a  catholick  bishop, 
that  is,  a  pastor,  belongmg  to  the  catholick  church,  and  one 
who  hath  a  share  in  its  government,  he  is  not  otherwise  ac- 
counted so,  but  as  he  has  the  charge  of  a  particular  church, 
lyhich  is  a  component  part  of  the  cadiolick  church.  The 
catholick,  or  universal  church,  is  no  other  than  the  aggregate 
of  all  the  individual  churches,  and  the  one  christian  episcopate, 
wherein  all  bishops  have  been  said  to  be  sharers,  is  the  aggre- 
gate of  all  the  individual  episcopates  possessed  by  the  several 
bishops.  Thus  Cyprian  (Epist.  55^)  denominates  the  church 
of  Christ,  "  Una  ecclesia  in  multa  membra  divisa  ;"  and  the 
episcopal  office,  (De  unitate  ecclesise)  "  Unus  episcopatus,  cu- 
"  jus  a  singulis  in  solidum  pars  tenetur."  One  episcopate 
whereof  each  bishop  occupies  a  distinct  part ;  or  still  more 
explicitly  in  our  language,  One  great  superintendency,  where- 
of each  is  the  superintendent  of  a  part.  He  therefore  can  have 
no  share  in  this  one  episcopate,  vi'ho  is  bishop  or  pastor  of  no 
part,  and  has  nothing  to  superintend.  Again  the  same  father 
tells  us,  "  Singulis  pastoribus  portio  gregis  adscripta  est,  quam 
"'  regat  unusquisque,  rationem  actus  sui  Domino  redditurus." 
He  consequently  can  be  no  bishop  or  pastor  in  the  church,  to 
whom  no  portion  of  Christ's  flock  is  committed,  and  who  has 
none  to  govern  or  instruct.  That  only  is  a  member,  which  has 
in  the  body  a  particular  function,  by  the  proper  discharge 
whereof  the  good  of  the  whole  is  promoted.  Any  thing  else, 
such  as  a  wen,  or  other  excrescence,  though  in  the  body,  is  no 
member,  with  wlatever  name  you  may  please  to  dignify  it. 

We  have  seen,  lowever,  that  from  a  few  instances  at  first,  in 
which  men,  for  urgent  reasons,  obtained  exemptions  from 
ministring,  when  there  did  not  seem  to  result  any  inconve- 
niency  from  dispensing  with  their  service,  and  when  they 
readily  renounced  both  the  title  and  the  profits  of  the  place, 
there  gradually  sprang  the  abuse  of  ordaining  more  presbyters 
and  deacons  than  the  particular  church,  wherein  they  wei-e  or- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  17f 

dained,  could  have  any  occasion  ftir,  and  to  the  care  of  which 
they  were  not  considered  as  being  destined.  Some  found 
their  account  in  being  once  named  of  the  order.  Itw^asa  kind 
of  episcopal  testimonial  of  their  qualifications  and  abilities. 
And,  indeed,  if  those  ordinations  had  been  universally  under- 
stood  as  importing  no  more,  and  the  persons  so  ordained  had 
been  regarded  not  as  actual  ministers,  but  as  licentiates  in  the 
ministry,  properly  tried  and  attested,  the  practice,  to  say  the 
least,  might  have  admitted  some  plausible  excuses.  But  this 
was  not  the  footing  on  which  they  stood.  Worldly  tnotives, 
exemptions  from  secular  jurisdictions,  and  other  privileges, 
often  induced  men  to  court  this  distinction.  The  bishops,  too, 
beginning  to  consider  if^s  a  sort  of  addition  to  their  dignity, 
to  have  a  numerous  clergy  under  them,  even  though  some  of 
these  were  rather  nominally  than  really  such,  were  often  too 
easily  persuaded,  to  grant  this  favour  to  those  who  asked  it. 
Sometimes,  as  I  observed,  even  bishops  were  ordained  at  large 
v/ithout  a  diocess. 

This  abuse,  when  once  it  had  gotten  footing,  increased  dai" 
ly,  insomuch,  that  it  became  necessary  at  last  to  give  a  check 
to  it.  Accordingl)^,  in  the  council  of  Chalcedon,  it  was  pro- 
hibited, and  all  such  loose  ordinations  were  declared,  (Canon 
6th,)  I  say  not  irregular  or  uncanonical,  but  absolutely  null. 

The    words    are,    taq  uTroXvlag  x^t^olo]i>}fA.£Viii  upta-iv  71  otyta  crvvooog  xx,vpov 

tx^tv  Tjjy  roiAv%v  ^upoB-ecrietV)  3^  (Mj^ccfAii  ^vvot.<r-6xi  evipyetv.  Nothing  in  lan- 
guage can  be  more  express,  aKvpcv  x.^ipoB-icixv,  irritam  ordinatiO' 
nem,  a  void  ordination. 

Further  they  do  not  say,  that  when  men,  so  ordained,  of- 
ficiate, their  conduct  is  criminal,  as  was  the  style  some  cen- 
turies afterwards,  in  regard  to  those  who  officiated,  in  con- 
tempt of  church-censures,  but  they  affirm  that  such  can  no 
where  officiate,  nijS'a.f^  ^vvx^Sat  evepyeiv,  and  consequently,  that 
their  ministrations  are  no  ministrations  at  all.  It  deserves  our 
notice,  that,  notwithstanding  the  corrupt  practice  which  had 
prevailed,  there  still  remained  so  much  of  the  primitive  no- 
tion of  ordination  to  the  episcopal  office,  (for  they  had  long 
considered  the  presbyters  as  only  the  bishop's  curates  and  as- 
sistants) as-  the  solemn  assignment  of  a  person  to  a  particular 
congregation,  to  discharge  among  them  the  functions  of  a  pas- 
tor, that  they  could  not  conceive  it  to  be  an  ordination,  where 
no  such  charge  was  given,  and  when  a  man  properly  got  no 
office  to  exercise.  It  appeared  a  mere  illusion^  the  name  with= 
out  the  thing.  Nothing  can  be  plainer,  than  that  as  yet  they 
had  no  conception  of  the  mystick  character  impressed  by  the 
bishop's  hand  in  ordaining,  which  no  power  on  earth  can  can«. 
eel.      The  canon  above-mentioned  was  confirmed  by  m&tif 

z 


irs  LECTURES  oisr 

posterior  canons.  Hence  it  came  to  be  regarded  as  an  es" 
tablished  rule,  or  maxim,  in  the  church,  that  none  could  be 
ordained  without  a  title,  which,  though  at  first  it  was  applied 
only  to  bishops,  came,  after  the  subdivision  of  his  parish  into 
separate  charges,  to  be  also  sometimes  applied  to  presbj^ters. 
By  a  title  was  then  understood  the  actual  charge  of  some  con- 
gregation. I  had  occasion,  in  a  former  lecture,  to  observe, 
that  the  Latin  word  titulus  was  the  name  that  was  given  to  the 
inferiour  churches,  or  chapels,  allotted  to  presbyters,  when  it 
was  found  necessary,  on  account  of  the  vast  accession  of  new 
converts,  that  the  bishop's  charge,  anciently  a  parish,  and  hav- 
ing but  one  church,  should  be  divided  and  apportioned  to  the 
several  presbyters.  A  man  was  said  then  to  have  a  title,  when 
he  had  obtained  a  chapel  or  church  wherein,  and  a  people  for 
whose  behoof,  he  was  to  execute  the  ministry.  But  as  the 
import  of  words  gradually  changes  with  the  manners  and  the 
times,  by  the  term  title^  people  came  at  length  to  understand 
only  a  living,  whether  there  was  any  charge,  any  cura  anima- 
rum,  or  not.  Thus  the  canons  originally  intended  to  prevent 
any,  under  the  denomination  of  clergy,  from  being  idle,  were 
construed  in  such  a  manner,  as  though  they  had  been  intended 
to  prevent  any,  under  the  denomination  of  clergy,  from  be- 
ing indigent.  And  the  reason  they  then  gave  for  the  rule  was, 
lest  such  clergymen  should  be  compelled,  by  necessity,  to  ac- 
(^uire  a  livelihood,  by  manual  labour,  and  thus  derogate  from 
the  dignity  of  the  priesthood.  Idleness,  in  their  apprehension, 
was  no  way  derogator}^' ;  manual  labour  was.  Paul's  notions 
were  surely  very  different ;  for  he  did  not  think  that  he  brought 
any  disgrace  on  the  apostleship,  when  he  worked  with  his 
hands  at  the  humble  trade  of  tent-making.  But  this  by  the 
way. 

Some  ages  afterwards  Pope  Alexanderthe  third,  adoptingthe 
aforesaid  interpretation,  gave  to  the  rule  this  turn,  that  none 
should  be  ordained  without  a  title  from  which  he  could  draw 
a  subsistence  ;  and  added  this  exception,  unless  he  has  enough 
of  his  own,  dr  by  paternal  inheritance  ;  an  exception,  doubt- 
less, very  r^sonable,  if  the  sole  purpose  of  a  title  was  to  af- 
ford a  man  whereon  to  live.  Henee  sprang  new  abuses,  and 
some  of  the  vilest  artifices  for  making  that  pass  for  a  patri- 
mony, which  had  been  lent  to  a  man  merely  for  the  purpose 
of  assisting  him  fraudulently  to  obtain  ordination.  In  conse- 
quence whereof,  there  were  numbers  of  these  notninal  and  fic- 
titious clergy,  shepherds  that  had  no  sheep,  and  overseers 
that  had  nothing  to  oversee,  who  lived  in  indigence  as  well 
as  in  idleness,  to  the  no  small  scandal  of  the  people,  and  dis- 
honour of  those  functions  of  which  they  bore  the  name.     At 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  179 

kngth,  however,  the  import  of  the  word  title  seems  to  have 
sunk  so  low,  as  to  imply  neither  church,  nor  charge,  nor  liv- 
ing, but  a  bare  name  j  insomuch,  that  a  titular  priest,  or  a  ti- 
tular bishop,  came  universally  to  denote  a  priest,  or  a  bishop, 
who  (in  all  the  former  acceptations  of  the  term)  has  no  title. 
Such  were  those  Utopian  clergy,  whom  Pauormitan  has  not 
improperly,  though  derisively,  styled  nullatenentes,  holding 
nothing,  and  who  have  been  sometimes  honoured  with  the  ad- 
dition of  bishops,  in  partibus  injidelium^  this  serving  as  a  con 
venient  sort  of  general  designation,  to  supply  the  name  of  a 
particular  bishoprick.  Indeed  the  custom  still  uniformly  re- 
tained in  the  church  of  Rome,  of  annexing  some  such  addi- 
tion, is  an  irrefragable  evidence  of  the  ideas  which  were  from 
the  beginning  entertained  of  the  oflEice,  as  incapable  of  sub- 
sisting without  a  charge. 

In  the  latter  ages  the  policy  of  the  court  of  Rome  came  to 
be  concerned  in  supporting  this  with  many  other  irregular 
practices.  The  power  of  dispensing  with  ecclesiastical  ca- 
nons was  a  prerogative,  which  that  ambitious  see  had  for  some 
time  arrogated,  and  not  without  success.  It  found  its  account 
in  it  in  more  ways  than  one.  When  once  the  minds  of  men 
became  familiarized  to  this  usage,  (however  much  the  wiser 
part  would  condemn  it  on  account  of  its  consequences)  it  would 
be  no  longer  viewed  in  the  same  light.  People  would  still  be 
Sensible  of  the  irregularity  and  faultiness,  but  would  no  lonr 
ger  perceive  the  absurdity  and  nullity  of  it.  Not  only  the 
commonness  of  the  practice,  but  the  very  epdthets  and  titles 
given  to  these  nominal  pastors,  together  with  the  sameness  in 
respect  of  privileges,  and  of  the  jurisdiction  to  which  they 
were  amenable,  with  those  properly  of  the  clerical  body,  would 
all  serve  to  cover  the  defect.  People  would  no  longer  be 
apt  to  think  with  Leo,  who  was  bishop  of  Rome  about  the 
middle  of  the  fifth  century,  and  is,  on  account  of  his  writings, 
considered  as  a  doctor  of  the  church,  who  affirms  positively 
in  one  of  his  letters,  (Epist.  92,  ad  Rustick.  cap.  1,)  "  Vana 
*'  est  habenda  ordinatio,  quae  nee  loco  fundata  est,  nee  aucto^ 
"  ritate  mUnita."  That  you  may  better  understand  the  phrase 
he 0  fundata^  it  may  be  proper  to  observe,  that  among  the  La- 
tins, at  that  time,  when  a  man,  in  being  ordained,  was  as- 
signed to  a  particular  parish,  or  charge,  it  was  called  ordina- 
tio localis,  and  the  incumbents,  by  way  of  distinction  from  the 
nullatenentes,  were  called  locales.  However  much  the  vague 
kind  of  ordination,  opposed  to  localis,  was,  from  ambitious 
motives,  patronised  by  his  successours,  this  pope  does  not  he- 
sitate to  style  it,  not  illicita,  but  vana :  not  unlawful,  (though 
this  might  also  have  been  said  with  truth)  but  of  no  eftcct. 


180  LECTURES  ON 

To  have  said  the  former  only,  would  have  implied  no  Kiore, 
than  that  there  was  a  fault  in  granting  such  orders  ;  what  he 
did  say  implies,  that  there  was  no  real  ordination  in  them. 
The  doctrine  of  the  character  had  not  yet  been  discovered. 

One  will  perhaps  be  surprised  to  hear,  that  our  Scotch  epis" 
copal  party,  who  have  long  affected  to  value  themselves  on  the 
regular  transmission  of  their  orders,  have  none  but  what  they 
derive  from  bishops  nierely  nominal.  I  do  not  mention  this 
with  a  view  to  derogate  from  their  powers,  but  only  as  an  ar™ 
gumentum  ad  hominem,  to  show  how  much  their  principles 
militate  against  themselves.  It  does  not  suit  my  notion  'of 
Christianity,  to  retaliate  on  any  sect,  or  to  forbid  any  to  cast 
out  devils  in  the  name  of  Christ,  because  they  follow  not  us. 
If  the  lust  of  power  had  not  with  churchmen  more  influence 
than  the  spirit  of  the  gospel,  greater  attention  would  have  been 
given  to  the  decision  of  their  master  in  a  like  case.  Even  their 
own  writers  acknowledge,  that  immediately  after  the  death  of 
Doctor  Ross,  bishop  of  Edinburgh,  the  last  of  those  ordain- 
ed before  the  revolution,  there  were  no  local  bishops  in  Scot- 
land, not  one  appointed  to  any  dioeess,  or  having  the  inspec- 
tion of  any  people,  or  spiritual  jurisdiction  over  any  district. 
But  there  were  bishops  who  had  been  ordained  at  large,  some 
by  bishop  Ross,  others  by  some  of  the  Scotch  bishops,  who, 
after  the  revolution,  had  retired  to  England.  The  warmest 
partisans  of  that  sect  have  not  scrupled  to  own,  that  at  that 
gentleman's  decease  all  the  diocesses  in  Scotland  were  become 
vacant,  and  even  to  denominate  those  who  had  been  ordained 
in  the  manner  above-mentioned,  Utopian  bishops  ;  a  title  not 
differing  materially  from  that  I  have  given  them,  merely  nomi- 
nal bishops.  For  as  far  as  I  can  learn,  they  were  not  titular, 
even  in  the  lowest  sense.  No  axiom  in  philosophy  is  more  in- 
disputable than  that  ^uod  nullibi  est^  non  est.  The  ordination, 
therefore,  of  our  present  Scotch  episcopal  clergy,  is  solely 
frona  presbyters  ;  for  it  is  allowed,  that  those  men  who  came 
under  the  hands  of  bishop  Ross  had  been  regularly  admitted 
ministers  or  presbyters,  in  particular  congregations,  before 
the  revolution.  And  to  that  first  ordination,  I  maintain  that 
their  farcical  consecration  by  doctor  Ross,  and  others,  when 
they  were  solemnly  made  the  depositaries  of  no  deposite,  com* 
manded  to  be  diligent  in  doing  no  work,  vigilant  in  the  over- 
sight of  no  flock,  assiduous  in  teaching  and  governing  no  peo- 
ple, and  presiding  in  no  church,  added  nothing  at  all.  Let  no 
true  son  of  our  church  be  offended,  that  I  acknowledge  our 
nonjurors  to  have  a  sort  of  presbyterian  ordination ;  for  I 
would  by  no  means  be  understood  as  equalising  theirs  to  that 
which  obtains  with  us.     Whoever  is  ordained  amongst  us  is 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  Ut 

ardained  a  bishop  by  a  class  of  bishops.  It  is  true  we  neither 
assume  the  tities,  nor  enjoy  the  revenues,  of  the  dignified 
clergy,  so  denominated  in  other  countries  ;  but  we  are  not  the 
less  bishops  in  every  thing  essential,  for  being  more  confor- 
mable to  the  apostolical  and  primitive  model,  when  every  bi- 
shop had  but  one  parish,  one  congregation,  one  church  oi' 
place  of  common  worship,  one  altar  or  communion  table,  and 
was  perhaps  as  poor  as  any  of  us.  Whereas  the  ordination  of 
our  nonjurors  proceeds  from  presbyters,  in  their  own  (that  is, 
in  the  worst)  sense  of  the  word^  men  to  whom  a  part  only  of 
the  ministerial  powers  was  committed,  and  from  whom  parti- 
cularly was  wi'th-held  the  right  of  transmitting  orders  to  others. 
When  we  say  that  our  orders  are  from  presbyters,  we  do  not 
use  the  term  in  their  acceptation,  but  in  that  wherein  we  find 
it  used  by  Luke,  in  the  acts  of  the  apostles,  by  Paul  in  his 
epistles,  and  (if  the  name  of  fathers  be  thought  to  add  any 
weight)  by  the  purest  and  earliest  fathers,  Clemens  Romanus, 
Polycarp,  and  others,  presbyters,  in  short,  whom  the  Holy 
Ghost  has  made  bishops  of  the  flock.  But  when  we  say  their 
orders  are  from  presbyters,  we  use  the  word  not  in  the  apos- 
tolical, but  in  the  more  recent  sense,  for  a  sort  of  subordi- 
nate ministers,  who  are  not  authorized  to  ordain,  and  who, 
on  Dr.  Hammond's  hypothesis,  as  well  as  ours,  were  not  ori«i 
ginally  in  the  church. 

Pope  Leo's  way  of  thinking,  on  this  subject,  is  indeed  the 
way  that  every  man  would  naturally  think,  previously  to  the 
impression  which  habit  never  fails  to  produce.  For  example, 
what  would  one  think  of  the  pretext  of  making  a  man  a  king, 
ci7i'o>^s>^v/^emi,  that  is,  without  giving  him  either  subjects  or  a 
kingdom  ?  You  will  say,  But  may  not  the  right  to  a  kingdom 
be  conferred  on  a  man,  whom  we  cannot  put  in  possession  ^ 
Admit  it  may  ;  that  is  not  parallel  to  the  case  in  hand.  Those 
merely  titular  bishops  get  no  more  the  right,  than  they  get  the 
possession,  of  any  one  diocess  on  the  face  of  the  earth.  Nor 
was  it  ever  denied,  that  if,  on  the  pretence  of  their  consecra- 
tion, they  had  seized  any  charge,  whether  vacant  or  full,  thev 
would  have  been  as  much  intruders,  as  though  they  had  never 
been  ordained  at  all.  The  only  thing,  therefore,  that  could  be 
said  to  be  exactly  similar,  would  be  the  coronation  and  en- 
thronement of  a  man  with  many  pompous  ceremonies,  whom 
you  in  the  end  saluted  king,  but  to  whom  you  gav^e  neither 
the  right  nor  the  possession  of  a  single  subject,  or  of  a  single 
foot  of  territory.  What  could  be  said  more  justly  of  such  a 
ceremony  than  what  Pope  Leo  said  of  those  ordinations  ? 
*'  Vana  est  habenda  inauguratio."  It  ought  to  be  held  a  sham 
inauguration,  "  Qua  nee  loco  fundata   est,  nee  auctoritate 


18^  LECTURES  ON 

"  munita."  Should  it  be  urged,  that  the  title  king  must  be 
very  blank  without  the  name  of  some  region  or  country,  over 
which  the  kingly  power  extends.  I  answer,  not  a  jot  blanker 
tiian  the  title  biahop  or  priest^  without  the  name  of  diocess  or 
parish.  And  if  a  bare  name  will  serve,  nothing  is  more  easily 
supplied :  king  of  the  planet  Saturn^  or  of  Terra  australis  in- 
cognita^ will  sound  as  well,  and  mean  as  much,  as  bishop  in 
partibus  injidelium.  By  the  way,  a  bishop's  charge  is  a  church, 
exj4A;js-<«,  and  a  church  consists  only  of  believers.  Infidels, 
therefore,  are  properly  no  part  of  his  charge,  no  more  than 
evolves  or  foxes  are  part  of  the  flock  of  a  shepherd. 

With  the  Romanists  matrimony  and  holy  orders  are  both 
equally  sacraments,  and  are,  besides,  thought  to  have  a  great 
analogy  to  each  other.  The  relation  which  Christ  bears  to  his 
church,  that  is,  the  church  universal,  is  in  Scripture  compared 
to  the  relation  which  the  husband  bears  to  the  wife.  And  the 
relation  which  the  bishop  bears  to  the  particular  church  under 
his  care,  has  been  often  represented  by  the  fathers  as  an  einblem 
of  the  relation  which  Christ  bears  to  the  church  universal. 
Pope  Innocent  the  third  adopts  the  same  metaphor,  calling 
ordination  the  spiritual  marriage  of  the  bishop  to  his  church. 
To  this  idea  also  the  ceremony  of  the  ring  in  consecration, 
still  retained  in  the  church  of  Rome,  unquestionably  owes  its 
origin.  No  consistent  Roman  catholic,  therefore,  can  be  of-* 
fended,  that  I  borrow  an  illustration  from  what  he  accounta 
likewise  a  sacrament,  and  the  most  analogous  of  them  all,  by 
the  consent  of  popes  and  fathers,  to  the  subject  in  hand.  Now 
if  it  had  happened  to  be  (as,  no  doubt,  if  it  had  suited  any  poli- 
tical purpose,  it  v/ould  have  been)  the  practice  to  celebrate 
marriages  sometimes,  »7coXzXv^au<i^  wherein,  if  you  will  admit 
the  absurdity  of  the  expression,  which,  in  these  cases,  is  una- 
voidable, you  make  a  man  a  husband,  or  marry  him  without 
giving  him  a  wife,  what  would  really  have  been  conferred  on 
the  man  by  such  a  ceremony  ?  By  marriage,  indeed,  you  lay 
him  under  certain  obligations,  and  give  him  certain  rights.  But 
as  the  wife  is  the  object  of  the  one,  and  the  source  of  the  other, 
where  there  is  no  wife  they  can  have  no  existence.  The  case 
of  the  bishop  is  precisely  the  same.  If  you  give  him  no  charge, 
tiie  obligations  to  superintendency,  and  the  claims  of  submis- 
sion and  support,  for  want  of  a  subject,  can  have  no  existence. 
Vvhat  then  is  there  in  the  one  ceremony  more  nugatory  than  in 
the  other?  For  if  unmeaning  words  will  satisfy,  why  may  not 
the  mvstical,  invisible,  indelible  character  of  husband  be  im- 
printed by  the  first,  as  that  of  priest  or  bishop  is  by  the  second  ? 
Holy  writ  gives  just  as  much  countenance  to  the  one  as  to  the 
ether.     But  we  may  venture  to  affirm,  that  if  it  had  not  suited 


Ecclesiastical  history.  iss 

the  church's  policy  to  have  some  examples  of  such  ordinations, 
unauthorized  alike  by  Scripture,  and  by  the  nature  of  the 
thing,  the  notion  of  the  character,  in  the  way  it  has  been  pro- 
pounded by  the  schoolmen,  had  never  been  heard  of. 

When  those  merely  titular  bishops  and  priests  came  to  be 
elected  into  diocesan  or  parochial  charges,  the  question  was, 
in  what  manner  were  they  to  be  received  ?  To  re-ordain  them 
would  have  thrown  an  imputation  on  the  first  ordination,  as 
though  it  had  been  of  no  significancy,  and  little  better  than  a 
solemn  farce.  This  (though  manifestly  for  some  a^es  the  doc- 
trine of  the  church  concerning  them)  was  now  by  all  means  to 
be  avoided,  as  it  might  tend  both  to  correct  an  abuse,  which 
the  rulers  of  the  church  found  their  account  in  supporting,  and 
to  derogate  from  the  people's  reverence  for  the  soleinnities  of 
religion.  Therefore,  beside  what  maj'  be  said  to  be  conferred 
visibly  and  intelligibly  in  all  regular  ordinations,  the  charge  of 
a  certain  district,  in  what  regards  spiritual  matters,  and  the 
oversight  of  the  people,  there  must  be  something  invisible  and 
Unintelligible,  which  is  nevertheless  the  principal,  else  aU 
those  loose  ordinations  would  be  mere  nullities.  This  myste- 
rious something  they  call  the  character  impressad,  which  was 
no  sooner  discovered  or  devised,  than  it  constituted  the  essence 
of  the  sacrament ;  the  other  particulars  relating  to  the  charge 
of  a  flock,  which  to  an  ordinary  understanding  might  appear  to 
be  the  whole,  were  then  found  to  be  but  circumstances.  And 
as  the  general  practice  of  the  church  came  at  length  to  be,  (for 
in  this  they  were  for  several  ages  far  from  being  uniform)  to 
disapprove  re-ordaining,  as  well  as  re-baptlaing  and  re-confirm- 
ing; and  that  even  though  the  baptism,  confirmation,  or  ordi- 
nation, had  been  given  by  a  heretick,  or  schismatick,  or  though 
the  receiver  had  afterwards  apostatized,  they  cqnceived  that  a 
character,  though  not  the  same  character,  was  the  immediate 
result  of  all  these  ordinances,  and  that  being  indeliblcj  it  need-= 
ed  not  to  be  renewed. 

It  were  in  vain  to  lcx)k  for  this  tenet  in  Scripture,  wher^ 
there  is  not  the  faintest  trace  of  any  such  conception.  It  were 
no  less  vain  to  search  for  it  in  the  fathers,  who  were  unacquaint- 
ed alike  with  the  name  and  the  thing.  This  even  some  of  the 
Romish  doctors  themselves  have  not  scrupled  to  admit,  found- 
ing the  doctrine  solely  ou  the  authority  of  the  church.  But 
indeed  on  this  (as  on  many  ether  articles)  the  doctrine  of  the 
church  has  varied  with  the  times.  The  council  of  Nice,  the 
first  of  the  ecumenical  councils,  expresslv  decreed,  that  such 
bishops  and  presbyters  as  had  been  ordained  by  Miletius,  a 
deposed  bishop,  for  the  merely  nominal  or  Utopian  bishops 
were  not  then  known,  sliould  not  be  admitted  tu  serve  the 


184  LECTURES  OK 

church  as  either  bishops  or  presbyters,  till  they  had  beeii  duly 
re-ordained,  f^Lvs-mali^x  x^'?"'^"^"*  'oe^'^taFSevleci*.  If  an  overture  of 
this  kind,  in  regard  to  any  degraded  prelate,  had  been  made  at 
Trent,  in  the  last  of  their  councils,  it  would  have  been  received 
with  universal  abhorrence,  and  considered  aS  proceeding  either 
from  the  rankest  heresy,  or  from  the  grossest  ignorance.  But 
that  it  was  no  heresy  for  man)'  centuries  after  the  Nicene  sy- 
nod, is  manifest  from  the  uniform  style  on  this  subject,  both 
of  the  ecclesiastical  writers,  arid  of  the  councils.  Would  we 
then  track  this  nonsense  to  its  source  ?  We  must  dip,  or  rather 
dive,  into  the  futile  logomacbies  of  the  schoolmen  ;  for  it  will 
be  found  to  be  the  genuine  production  of  the  darkly  subtle 
metaphysico-scholastical  theology  of  the  middle  ages.  No- 
thing could  be  idler  than  to  attempt  the  refutation  of  a  dogma; 
for  which  a  vestige  of  evidence  has  never  been  produced.  But 
were  the  business  of  refuting  incumbent  upon  us,  a  little  fur= 
ther  examination  of  the  subject,  and  of  the  opinions  that  have 
been  advanced  concerning  it,  Would  entirely  supersede  the  ne- 
cessity. 

Two  puzzling  questions  have  been  moved  on  this  subject, 
which  were  hotly  agitated,  but  not  solved,  in  the  council  of 
Trent,  where  it  was  thought  necessafy,  however,  to  make  a 
decree,  affirming  the  character  in  opposition  to  one  of  the 
Lutheran  articles  denying  it.  One  question  is,  wherein  it 
consists  ;  the  other,  whereon  it  is  imprinted.  In  answer  to 
the  former,  relating  to  the  quiddity  of  the  character,  as  these 
sophisters  love  to  express  it,  it  has  been  observed,  first  nega- 
tively, that  it  cannot  be  an  infusion  of  grace,  as  of  faith,  hope, 
or  charity,  because,  say  our  profound  disquisitors,  all  the  seven 
sacraments  confer  grace,  whereas  it  is  on  the  three  that  cannot 
be  repeated,  the  unreiterable,  which  imprint  a  character ;  be- 
sides, it  can  be  neither  grace  nor  virtue  for  this  other  reason  : 
both  these  may  be  lost,  whereas,  the  character  is  indelible.  As 
little  can  it  be  a  particular  qualification,  which  fits  the  person 
for  the  discharge  of  the  duties  of  the  office,  for  a  man  may 
become  totally  unqualified  by  age  and  infirmities,  or  he  may 
unqualify  himself  by  vice.  Besides,  it  has  never  been  denied 
that  persons,  very  ill  qualified,  have  been  ordained,  and  never 
appeared  one  jot  better  qualified  after  their  ordination  than 
before.  It  could  not  be  the  gift  of  justification,  because  this 
is  what  the  impenitent,  in  mortal  sin,  does  not  receive  in  any 
sacrament ;  and  yet  an  impenitent,  in  mortal  sin,  may  be  or- 
dained and  receive  the  character.  But  to  consider  the  thing 
positively,  there  were  who  maintained  that  it  was  a  quality 

*  Tbeodor.  Hist.  1, 1,  c.  ij£. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  iss 

Among  those  there  were  four  different  opinions,  according  to 
the  four  sorts  of  qualities  distinguished  in  the  schools.  Some 
affirmed  that  it  is  a  spiritual  power,  others  a  habit  or  disposi- 
tion, others  a  spiritual  figure  ;  nor  was  the  notion  that  it  is  a 
sensible  metaphorical  quality  without  its  advocates.  Some 
would  have  it  to  be  a  real  relation,  others  a  fabrick  of  the 
mind  ;  though  it  was  by  no  means  clear  how  far  these  consi- 
dered it  as  removed  from  nothing. 

As  to  the  second  question,  the  ubi  of  the  character,  there 
was  no  less  variety  of  sentiments  than  about  the  first,  some 
placing  it  in  the  essence  of  the  soul,  others  in  the  understand- 
ing ;  some  in  the  will,  and  others  more  plausibly  in  the  imagi- 
nation ;  others  even  in  the  hands  and  the  tongue  ;  but,  by  the 
general  voice,  the  body  was  excluded.  So  that  the  whole  of 
what  they  agreed  in  amounts  to  this,  that  in  the  unreiterable 
sacraments,  as  they  call  them,  something,  they  know  not  what, 
is  imprinted,  they  know  not  how,  on  something  in  the  soul  of 
the  recipient,  they  kno\v  not  where,  which  never  can  be  deleted. 

In  regai-d  to  the  indelibility  all  agreed,  insomuch,  that 
though  a  bishop,  priest,  or  deacon,  turn  heretick  or  schismatick, 
deist  or  atheist,  he  still  retains  the  character,  and  though  not 
a  christian  man,  he  is  still  a  christian  bishop,  priest,  or  deacon  ; 
nay,  though  he  be  degraded  from  his  office  and  excommuni- 
cated, he  is,  in  respect  of  the  character,  still  the  same.  Though 
he  be  cut  off  from  the  church,  he  is  still  a  minister  in  the 
church.  In  such  a  situation  to  perform  any  of  the  sacred 
functions,  would  be  in  him  a  deadly  sin,  but  these  would  be 
equally  valid  as  before.  Thus  he  may  not  be  within  the  pale 
of  the  church  himself,  and  yet  be  in  the  church  a  minister  of 
Jesus  Christ.  He  may  openly  and  solemnly  blaspheme  God, 
and  abjure  the  faith  of  Christ ;  he  may  apostatize  to  Judaism, 
to  Mahometism,  or  to  Paganism,  he  still  retains  the  character. 
He  may  even  become  a  priest  of  Jupiter,  or  a  priest  of  Baal, 
and  still  continue  a  priest  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  character, 
say  the  schoolmen,  is  not  cancelled  in  the  damned,  but  remains 
with  the  wicked  to  their  disgrace  and  greater  confusion ;  so 
that  even  in  hell  they  are  the  ministers  of  Jesus  Christ,  and 
the  messengers  of  the  new  covenant.  Nor  is  it  cancelled  in 
the  blessed,  but  remains  in  heaven  with  them  for  their  greater 
glory  and  ornament. 

I  have  been  the  more  particular  on  this  topick,  because  it  is 
a  fundamental  article,  with  a  pretty  numerous  class  (and  these 
not  all  Romanists.)  I  was  willing  to  explain  it,  as  for  as  it  is 
explicable,  from  the  writings  of  its  defenders,  being  persuaded 
that  on  those  who  do  not  discover  there  a  sufficient  confutation, 
teason,  and  argument,  Scripture  and  common  sense  will  raaif© 

A  a 


lag  LECTURES  ON 

no  impression*  An  author,  of  whose  sentiments  I  took  some 
notice  in  my  last  lecture,  has  observed*,  that  as  the  civilians 
have  their  fictions  in  law,  our  theologists  also  have  their  fictions 
in  divinity.  It  is  but  too  true,  that  some  of  our  theological 
systems  are  so  stuflFed  with  these,  that  little  of  plain  truth  is  to 
be  learnt  from  them.  And  I  think  it  will  be  doing  no 
injury  to  this  dogma  of  the  character,  to  rank  it  among 
those  fictions  in  divinity.  God  forbid  I  should  add  in 
the  not  very  decent  words  of  that  author,  (though  I  really  be- 
lieve he  meant  no  harm  by  them)  "  which  infinite  wisdom  and 
*'  goodness  hath  devised  for  our  benefit  and  advantage."  The 
God  of  truth  needs  not  the  assistance  of  falsehood,  nor  is  the 
cause  of  truth  to  be  promoted  by  such  means.  The  use  of 
metaphorical  expressions,  or  figurative  representations,  in 
Scripture,  give  no  propriety  to  such  an  application  of  a  terra 
so  liable  to  abuse. 

*  Hickes,  Christian  Priesthood,  1.  1,  ch.  ir,  §  8, 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  i8t 


LECTURE  XII. 


XN  the  prelections  I  have  already  given  on  the  ecclesiastical 
history,  I  have  traced  the  progress  of  the  hierarchy  as  far  up 
as  the  patriarchate,  and  shown  by  what  steps  that  kind  of  oli- 
garchy arose  in  the  church.  The  only  article  that  now  remains 
to  be  considered,  and  which  completes  the  edifice  of  spiritual 
despotism,  is  the  papacy.  You  all  know  the  common  plea,  on 
which  the  retainers  to  Rome  have,  not  indeed  from  the  begin- 
ning, but  for  many  ages  past,  founded  the  right  of  papal  domi- 
nion ;  namely,  first,  the  prerogatives  they  affirm  to  have  been 
given  by  our  Lord  to  the  apostle  Peter ;  and  secondly,  the  suc- 
cession of  their  bishops  to  that  apostle,  and  consequently  td 
those  prerogatives.  Every  judicious  and  impartial  inquirer 
must  quickly  discover,  that  both  the  premises,  by  which  their 
conclusion  is  supported,  are  totally  without  foundation.  Nei- 
ther had  Peter  the  prerogatives  which  they  pretend  he  had, 
nor  have  their  bishops  the  shadow  of  a  title  to  denominate 
themselves  his  successours. 

I  acknowledged,  in  a  former  lecture,  that  Peter  appears  to 
have  been  honoured  by  his  master  to  be  the  president  of  the 
sacred  college  of  his  apostles,  and  the  first  in  announcing  the 
doctrine  of  the  gospel,  both  to  the  Jews  and  to  the  Gentiles. 
I  have  also  shown,  that  this  is  the  highest  prerogative  of  which 
there  is  any  vestige  in  the  writings  of  the  New  Testament,  and 
that  there  was  not  any  particular  species  of  power  which  was 
given  to  him,  that  was  not  also,  by  their  common  Lord,  commu- 
nicated to  the  rest.  They  are  all  represented  as  alike  founda- 
tions of  this  new  Jerusalem,  which,  in  their  master's  name,  and 
as  his  spiritual  kingdom,  was  to  be  reared.  They  all  receive 
from  him  the  same  commission  for  the  conversion  and  instruc- 
tion of  all  nations.  They  are  all  encouraged  by  the  same 
promises  and  the  same  privileges.  Nay,  as  a  convincing 
proof  that  Peter,   far  from  claiming  a  superiority  over  the 


18|5  LECTURES  ON 

other  apostles,  did,  on  the  contrary,  subject  himself  to  their 
commands,  we  see  (Acts  viii,  14,)  that  "  when  the  apostles, 
"  which  were  at  Jerusalem,  heard  that  Samaria  had  received 
"  the  word  of  God,  they  sent  unto  them  Peter  and  John." 
Nor  did  Peter,  any  more  than  John,  disdain  to  serve  in  the 
capacity  of  legates  from  that  sacred  body.  Now  whether  is 
greater,  the  sender,  or  the  sent  ?  Canonists,  and  other  Romish 
writers,  affect  much  to  compare  the  pope  and  his  cardinals  to 
Peter  and  his  fellow-apostles.  Yet  I  suppose,  they  will  ac- 
knowledge, it  would  look  very  oddly  in  the  pope,  and  be  in 
fact  incompatible  v^^ith  papal  dignity,  to  be  sent  ambassadour 
from  the  conclave,  though  nothing  be  more  common,  in  the 
members  of  that  college,  than  to  receive  legatine  commissions 
from  him.  But  passing  this,  whatever  were  the  prerogatives 
of  Peter,  they  were  manifestly  personal,  not  official,  in  reward 
of  the  confession  which  he  was  the  first  to  make,  that  Jesus  is 
the  Messiah,  the  Son  of  God  ;  a  confession  which  may  justly 
be  denominated  the  foundation  of  the  whole  christian  edifice. 
Besides,  the  apostleship  itself,  as  I  showed  at  some  length, 
was  an  office  in  its  nature  temporary,  extraordinary,  and  in- 
capable of  succession.  In  point  of  right,  therefore,  no  peculiar 
privilege  can  be  claimed  by  any  church  as  derived  from  this 
apostle. 

And  if  from  the  question  of  right  we  come  to  the  matter  of 
fact,  the  special  relation  of  the  see  of  Rome  to  this  eminent 
ambassadour  of  Christ,  the  partisans  of  papal  ambition  have 
never  been  able  to  support  their  affirmations  by  any  thing  that 
deserves  the  name  of  evidence.  It  has  been  questioned  whe- 
ther Peter  ever  was  at  Rome.  The  only  ground  on  which  the 
papist  builds  his  assertion,  that  he  was  in  that  city,  and  found- 
ed the  church  in  it,  is  tradition ;  and  such  a  tradition  as  must 
appear  very  suspicious  to  reasonable  christians,  being  accom- 
panied with  a  number  of  legendary  stories,  which  are  totally 
unworthy  of  regard. 

In  opposition  to  such  traditionary  legends,  it  has  been  urged, 
that  mention  is  no  where  made  in  Scripture,  that  this  apostle 
was  ever  there  ;  notwithstanding  that  there  were  so  many  fa- 
vourable occasions  of  taking  notice  of  it,  if  it  had  been  fact, 
that  one  is  at  a  loss  to  conceive  how  it  could  have  been  avoided. 
No  hint  is  there  of  such  a  thing  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles, 
though  a  great  part  of  that  book  is  employed  in  recording  the 
labours  of  this  apostle  for  the  advancement  of  the  gospel,  and 
mention  is  made  of  different  places,  Jerusalem,  Samaria,  Lyd- 
da,  Joppa,  and  Csssarea,  where  he  exerted  himself  in  this  ser- 
vice. In  the  first  of  these  he  assisted  at  the  consultation, 
which  the  apostles,  elders,  and  brethren,  held  in  regard  to  cir- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  189 

cumcision,  and  the  ceremonies  of  the  law  ;  though  this  hap- 
pened a  good  deal  later  than  the  time  when  the  Romanists 
suppose  his  charge  at  Rome  to  have  commenced.  When 
Paul  afterwards  cajne  himself  to  Rome,  mention  is  made  of 
the  christians  he  found  there,  but  not  a  syllable  that  Peter 
either  then  was,  or  had  been  formerly  among  them.  Paul,  in 
his  long  epistle  to  the  Romans,  or  the  church  of  Christ  at 
Rome,  does  not  once  mention  the  person  whom  these  men 
pretepd  to  have  been  their  bishop.  This  silence  is  the  more 
remarkable,  that  towards  the  close  of  the  epistle  he  seems 
solicitous,  not  to  omit  taking  particular  notice  of  every  one  by 
name,  who,  residing  there,  could  be  denominated,  in  any  re^ 
spect,  a  fellow-labourer  in  the  common  cause.  Nay  more,  in 
the  beginning  of  that  epistle,  he  expresses  the  earnest  desire 
he  had  to  visit  them,  that  he  might  impart  to  them  some  spi- 
ritual gifts,  that  they  might  be  established.  This,  if  we  con- 
sider the  purpose  for  which  Peter  and  John  were  sent  by  the 
apostles  to  the  Samaritans,  converted  by  Philip,  as  recorded 
in  the  eighth  chapter  of  the  Acts,  will  appear  at  least  a  strong 
presumption,  that  no  apostle  had  been  yet  at  Rome.  Paul 
afterwards  wrote  from  Rome,  where  he  was  twice  a  prisoner, 
to  the  Galatians,  to  the  Ephesians,  to  the  Philippians.,  to  the 
Colossians,  to  Philemon,  to  Timothy,  without  taking  notice 
of  Peter  in  any  of  the  six  letters,  or  sending  any  salutations 
from  him,  notwithstanding  the  attention,  in  this  respect,  he 
pays  to  others.  When  he  said  to  Timothy,  "  At  my  first 
*'  answer,"  to  wit,  before  the  emperour  at  Rome,  "  no  man 
^'  stood  with  me,  but  all  men  forsook  me," — there  would 
surely  have  been  an  exception  in  favour  of  Peter,  if  any 
such  person  had  been  there.  Would  he  have  said,  in  writing 
to  the  Colossians  from  the  same  place,  that  Tychicus,  Onesi- 
mus,  Aristarchus,  Marcus,  and  Justus,  were  his  only  fellow- 
labourers  to  the  kingdom  of  God,  who  had  been  a  comfort  to 
hin^,  if  Peter  had  been  in  Rome  ?  Or  lastly,  when  he  told  his 
beloved  son  Timothy,  that  the  time  of  his  departure  v/as  at 
hand,  and  sent  him  salutations  from  all  the  brethren,  naming 
Eubulus,  Pudens,  Linus,  and  Claudia,  would  have  omitted 
Peter,,  if,  agreably  to  that  very  tradition  formerly  alluded  to, 
he  had  been  not  only  in  that  capital  at  the  time,  but  a  fellow- 
prisoner  in  the  same  jail  ? 

The  only  pretence  of  scriptural  evidence  advanced  by  the 
Romanists,  is  indeed  a  very  poor  one,  not  to  call  it  ridiculous. 
Peter,  say  they,  in  his  first  epistle,  presents  the  salutations  of 
the  church  at  Babylon,  by  which  they  would  have  it,  that  he 
must  certainly  have  meant  Rome.  If  they  think  he  spoke  pro- 
phetically, they  do  not,  by  this  interpretation,  pay  a  great  com- 


im  LECTURES  ON 

pliment  to  the  throne  of  the  hierarchy.  The  propriety  of  the 
application,  in  this  view,  we  do  not  mean  to  controvert.  But 
®ur  adversaries,  on  this  question,  must  be  sensible,  that  their 
explanation  is  merely  conjectural.  And  is  not  the  conjecture, 
which  others  make,  at  least  as  plausible,  that  by  Babylon  is 
here  meant  Jerusalem,  which  the  apostle  so  denominates  on 
sccount  of  its  apostacy,  by  the  rejection  and  murder  of  the 
Messiah,  and  on  account  of  its  impending  fate,  so  similar  to 
that  denounced  against  Babylon  ?  But  why,  say  others,  should 
we,  without  necessity,  recur  to  a  figurative  sense,  when  the 
words  are  capable  of  being  literally  interpreted  ?  To  do  sot 
would  seem  the  more  unreasonable,  in  this  case,  as  the  epistle  is 
written  in  a  simple,  and  not  an  allegorical,  style.  Why  must  the 
apostle  be  supposed  not  to  mean  the  ancient  Babylon,  in  Chal- 
dea,,  which  was  still  in  being,  and  was  then,  I  may  say ,  the  head- 
quarters of  the  Jews  in  the  east ;  a  place  famous  for  the  resi** 
dence  of  many  of  their  most  celebrated  doctors,  and  for  giving 
feirth  to  some  of  their  most  learned  performances  on  the  law  ? 
That  the  apostle  of  the  circumcision  should  go  to  preach  the 
gospel  in  Babylon,  the  capital  of  the  Jews  in  dispersion,  will 
be  thought  to  have  a  degree  of  probability,  which  it  would  re- 
quire positive  evidence  to  surmount.  Yet  I  have  heard  no- 
thing,  on  the  opposite  side,  but  supposition,  founded  on  vague 
and  obscure  traditions.  But  setting  aside  the  imperial  seat  of 
the  Chaldeans,  there  was,  at  that  time,  a  Babylon  in  Egypt,  a 
city  of  considerable  note.  What  should  make  it  be  thought 
improbable,  that  this  epistle  was  written  there  ?  That  either  of 
these  was  the  fact,  appears  to  me  beyond  comparison  more 
I;ikcly,  than  that  the  apostle  should  date  a  plain  letter  in  so  enig- 
matical a  manner,  as  could  not  fail  either  to  mislead  his  read- 
ers or  to  puzzle  them.  A  tolerable  reason  for  this  conduct 
I  have  never  heard.  For  had  there  been  any  danger  to  the 
writer  from  what  was  contained  in  the  letter,  it  would  have 
led  him  rather  to  suppress  his  own  name,  than  to  disguise  the 
place  where  it  was  written,  a  thing  of  no  imaginable  conse- 
quence. But  the  openness  with  which  he  introduces  hi& 
name  and  addition  at  the  head  of  the  epistle,  ought,  in  my 
opinion,  to  remove  every  suspicion  of  that  kind.  The  case  is. 
very  difTerent  in  the  interpretation  of  prophetick  writing,  such 
as  the  Apocalypse,  in  which  the  style  is  purposely  symbolical 
and  obscure.  Thus  we  are  fully  warranted  to  say,  that  there 
is  no  notice  taken  in  Scripture,  notwithstanding  the  numerous 
occasions  there  were  of  doing  it,  that  Peter  ever  was  in  Rome. 
I  add,  that  there  is  not  the  least  notice  of  such  a  thing  to  be 
found  in  the  writings  of  any  of  the  apostolick  fathers,  who  had 
been  in  the  former  part  of  their  lives  contemporaries  of  the 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  191 

apostles,  and  had  survived  them,  and  consequently  of  all  the 
ecclesiastical  writers  had  the  best  opportunity  of  knowing,  Cle- 
mentof  Rome,  itistrue,  mentions  Peter's  martyrdom  as  aknowa 
fact,  without  specifying  the  place.  It  had,  besides,  been  fore- 
told by  our  Lord.  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  it  must  have 
been  at  Rome,  both  because  it  is  agreeable  to  the  unanimous 
voice  of  antiquity,  and  because  the  sufferings  of  so  great  an 
apostle  could  not  fail  to  be  a  matter  of  such  notoriety  in  the 
church,  as  to  preclude  the  possibility  of  an  imposition  in  re* 
gard  to  the  place.  But  with  this  opinion  I  see  no  way  of  re- 
conciling the  silence  of  Scripture,  but  by  saying  that  Pe- 
ter's journey  to  Rome  was  posterior,  not  only  to  the  period 
with  which  the  history  of  the  Acts  concludes,  but  to  the  writ- 
ing of  Paul's  epistles.  In  this  case  it  is  manifest,  that  he 
could  not  have  beea  the  founder,  nor  even  one  of  the  earliest 
instructors  of  the  Roman  church.  It  is  astonishing,  that  at 
the  very  time,  as  is  pretended,  of  the  institution  of  the  papal 
supremacy,  and  of  the  instalment  of  the  first  hierarch,  from 
whom  all  the  rest  in  succession  derive  their  authority,  an  au- 
thority by  which  the  whole  church,  to  the  end  of  the  world, 
was  to  be  governed,  at  the  time  when  among  christians  it 
ought  to  have  been  most  conspicuous,  and  to  have  attracted 
the  greatest  attention,  so  profound  a  silence,  in  regard  to  it,  13 
observed  on  every  side.  No  hint  is  given  of  such  a  thing,  or 
of  any  circumstance  relating  to  it,  by  apostle,  evangelist,  or 
father.  And  that  mighty  sovereign  the  pope,  that  king  of" 
kings,  the  sublime  head  of  the  church  universal,  whose  throne 
was  erected  at  Rome,  is  treated  alike  by  all,  as  one  utterly 
unknown  and  unheard  of.  No  one  seems  to  have  formed  the 
least  conception  of  any  such  personage. 

I  shall  admit,  however,  that  all  that  has  been  advanced,  can- 
not be  accounted  a  proof  either  that  Peter,  in  the  course  of  his 
apostolical  peregrinations,  was  never  at  Rome,  or  even  that  he 
was  not  the  founder  of  that  church  ;  but  I  believe  that  every 
candid  and  capable  inquirer  will  consider  it  as  perfectly  suffi- 
cient to  evince,  first,  that  he  W3S  not  the  bishop  of  the  place, 
according  to  the  proper  acceptation  of  the  term,  and  secondly, 
that  their  bishop,  whoever  he  was,  was  not,  by  any  prerogative 
whatever,  distinguished  from  any  other  bishop.  If,  setting 
aside  the  apostles,  Linus,  agreeably  to  the  common  opinion, 
was  the  first  bishop  of  that  see,  and  was  ordained  before  the 
martyrdom  both  of  Peter  and  of  Paul,  the  latter,  when  writing 
to  Timothy,  a  very  little  before  his  own  death,  as  he  acquaints 
us  himself,  seems  to  have  had  very  odd  conceptions  of  the 
papal  dignity,  when  he  could  huddle  the  name  of  the  sovereign 
pontiff  with  certain  obscure  names,  no  where  else  to  be  found 


m  LECTURES  o]sr 

in  the  annals  of  history.  "  Eubulus,"  says  he,  "  greeteth  thee, 
"  and  Pudens,  and  Linus,  and  Claudia,  and  all  the  brethren." 
He  does  not  so  much  as  give  the  pope  the  precedency.  Is  this, 
the  manner  in  which  Paul  would  have  treated  the  vicar  of 
Christ,  had  he  known  or  acknowledged  any  such  character  r 
With  regard  to  Peter,  if,  what  has  been  said  does  not  satisfy, 
that  he  could  not  be  the  Roman  prelate,  the  Avords  Of  Paul,  irl 
his  epistle  to  the  Galatians,  (Gal.  ii.  7,  8,  9,)  an  epistle  written 
from  Rome,  are  perfectly  decisive.  There  Peter  is  expressly 
denominated  the  apostle  of  the  circumcision,  and  is  said  to 
have  had  the  conversion  of  the  Jews,  throughout  the  world, 
eminently  intrusted  to  his  care*  In  this  his  mission  is  con- 
trasted with  that  of  Paul,  who  is  styled,  by  way  of  eminence, 
the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles.  That  Peter  then  should  be  fixed 
in  the  metropolis  of  the  Gentile  world,  as  their  particular  pas- 
tor, the  pastor  of  a  church  consisting  mostly  of  converts  from 
idolatry^  is  palpably  irreconcilable  with  the  account  given  of 
him  by  his  brother  Paul.  Some  ancient  writers,  in  order  to 
remove  this  difficulty,  have  supposed,  that  there  were  at  first 
two  distinct  churches  at  Rome,  one  of  believing  Jews,  of 
which  Peter,  the  other  of  believing  Gentiles,  of  which  Paul, 
was  the  teacher.  But  this,  for  aught  appears,  is  unexampled 
in  apostolical  antiquity.  Though  the  Jewish  converts,  by 
themselves,  continued  for  some  time  in  the  observance  of 
rites  to  which  the  converts  from  heathenism  were  not  obliged, 
these  rites  nowise  entered  into,  or  affected,  their  social  worship, 
as  christians.  Being  one  in  Christ  Jesus,  and  members  one  of 
another,  it  is  much  more  probable,  that  they  all  assembled  in 
the  same  congregation,  communicated  with  one  another,  and. 
had  their  pastors  in  common.  To  have  done  otherwise  could 
not  fail  to  occasion  a  schism  between  the  two  parties. 

And  in  regard  to  the  other  point,  that  Peter  was  not  the 
bishop  of  that  city,  those  very  testimonies  evince,  which  have 
been  pleaded  by  the  Romanists,  to  prove  that  he  was  there, 
and  that  he  was  the  founder  of  their  church  ;  so  that  when 
any  ecclesiastical  writers  style  him  bishop,  (which  by  the  way 
is  not  done  by  the  earliest)  it  is  manifest  that  they  use  the 
term  not  in  the  strict  sense,  but  with  a  certain  latitude,  denot- 
ing only  that  whilst  he  remained  there,  he  took  a  concern  in 
regulating  the  affairs  of  that  church.  Ireneus,  one  of  the'' 
most  ancient  authorities  that  have  been  produced  in  support' 
of  the  tradition  that  Peter  was  at  Rome,  shows  manifestly,  in 
the  passage  quoted  from  him  by  Eusebius,  that  Peter  was  not 
considered,  in  his  time,  which  was  near  the  end  of  the  second 
century,  as  having  been  bishop  of  that  church,  or  even  as  its 
sole  founder.     His  words  are  these  (1«  v,  c.  6,)  (dsfAtxtc-iTdvliz  sv 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  19$ 

1^  .«<«9^«(i*»jo-«ty7f5  o'i  f-uiKM^ioi  ci'^oro?iOi  ex.y.Xi/i<rta,Vi  Aivm  r^v  tsj5  £'?n<rK07ajc, 
■Aeils^yniv  m%it^i<^civ.  "  The  blessed  apostles,"  (observe  he 
speaks  in  the  plural  number,  as  he  had  mentioned  a  little 
before  both  Peter  and  Paul)  "  having  founded  arid  constructed 
"  that  church,  delivered  the  episcopal  ofHce  into  the  hands  of 
"  Linus."  Accordu-igly,  in  mentioning  some  of  her  first  bishops, 
he  always  counts  from  Linus,  not  from  Peter,  calling  Anar 
cletus  the  second  bishop,  and  Clement  the  third.  All  these 
three  are  mentioned  also  by  Rutfinus,  in  the  fourth  century,  as 
succeeding  one  after  another  during  Peter's  life-time,  and  not 
as  succeeding  Peter  himself.  Nay,  he  affirms  still  more  parti- 
cularly, that  Peter  committed  to  them  the  office  of  bishop, 
that  he  might  not  be  detained  from  discharging  the  duties  of 
the  apostleship.  Several  of  the  ancients,  with  Ireneus,  ascribe 
the  founding  of  that  church  equally  to  both  apostles,  whom,  in 
a  looser  style,  some  denominate  bishops  as  well  as  apostleso 
In  this  manner  both  Epiphanius  and  Eusebius  speak  of  them. 
The  apostolical  constitutions,  a  compilation  ascribed  to  Cle- 
ment of  Rome,  but  manifestly  of  a  much  later  date,  though 
probably  extracted  in  part  out  of  the  old  apocryphal  writings, 
called  didascalies^  attributed  to  the  apostles,  and  to  apostolick 
men,  say,  that  Linus  was  the  first  bishop  of  Rome,  and  was 
ordained  by  Paul,  and  that  Cle.nent  was  the  second,  and  or- 
dained, after  Linus'  death,  by  Peter.  That  most  of  these 
constitutions,  as  we  now  have  them,  were  not  compiled  sooner 
than  the  end  of  the  fourth,  or  the  beginning  of  the  fifth,  cen- 
tury, bishop  Pearson*  and  Dr.  Grabef  have  put  beyond  a 
doubt.  That  the  order  about  the  observance  of  easterj  is 
copied  from  a  canon  to  that  purpose  of  the  council  of  Nice, 
and  stands  in  direct  opposition  to  the  primitive  practice  in  the 
east,  and  to  an  express  injunction  in  that  more  ancient  writing, 
called  Maz*}  aTcotsoXm,  some  fragments  whereof  are  preserved  iii 
Epiphanius,  is  manifest,  and  sufficiently  shows  that  the  com- 
pilers made  no  scruple  of  making  such  alterations  in  those 
didascalies,  as  they  judged  proper  for  adapting  them  to  the- 
doctrine  and  usages  of  their  owii  time.  In  the  end  of  the 
fourth  century,  therefore,  Peter  and  Paul  were  equally  ho- 
noured by  tradition  as  the  founders  of  the  Roman  church, 
but  neither  of  them  was  numbered  among  the  bishops  pro- 
perly so  called. 

But  it  does  not  satisfy  the  ambitious  views  of  Rome,  t0 
say,  that  Peter  was  the  founder  of  their  church ;  for  they  will 
readily  acknowledge,  that  he  was  the  founder  also  of  the 
church  at  Antioch,  and  indeed  of  many  others,   in  the  dif- 

*'  Vind.  Ign.  Pars  i,  c.  4.     f  Spicileg.  patrum.  sec.  1.     |  Lib.  v,  cap.  17. 

Bb 


194  LECTURES  OJST 

ferent  places  where  this  eminent  apostle  first  published  the 
gospel.  Paul  too  was  the  founder,  though  not  the  bishop,  in 
the  ordinary  and  proper  acceptation  of  the  term,  of  many 
churches  in  Asia  Minor,  in  Macedonia,  and  in  Greece.  And 
though  we  have  not  so  particular  information  about  the  rest, 
we  have  reason  to  believe,  that  every  one  of  the  apostles  was 
the  founder  of  some. 

But,  says  the  romanist,  is  it  not  agreeable  to  the  voice  of 
antiquity,  that  James  an  apostle  was  the  first  bishop  of  Jeru- 
salem ?  And  if  that  see  had  one  aposde  for  their  bishop,  why 
might  not  Rome  have  another  for  theirs  ?  This,  if  the  fact 
from  which  they  argue  were,  as  they  suppose  it  to  have  been, 
proves  only,  that  the  point  which  they  would  establish  in  the 
conclusion,  might  have  been,  that  there  was  nothing  incom- 
patible in  it,  but  by  no  means  that  it  was.  The  fact  itself, 
however,  on  which  they  build,  must  appear,  even  on  their  own 
principles,  an  absolute  uncertainty.  It  is  universally  agreed, 
that  the  name  of  the  first  bishop  of  Jerusalem  was  James,  and 
that  he  was  surnamed  the  Just,  but  it  is  not  agreed  that  this 
James  was  an  apostle.  Eusebius,  Hegesippus,  Epiphanius, 
Jerom,  Gregory  of  N;/sse,  Chrysostom,  have  been  numbered 
among  those  who  held,  that  this  James  was  only  one  of  the 
seventy  disciples.  Some  criticks  have  thought,  and  Math  great 
appearance  of  reason,  that  out  of  the  seventy,  and  after  them 
out  of  the  five  hundred,  to  whom  Paul  tells  us,  our  Lord  ap- 
peared at  once  after  his  resurrection,  all  the  first  pastors  of 
the  churches  of  Judea  in  particular  were  selected.  This,  too, 
is  entirely  agreeable  to  what  Clemens  Romanus,  in  a  passage 
I  had  occasion  formerly  to  quote,  acquaints  us,  was  the  uni- 
form custom,  that  those  who  were  the  first  fruits  to  the  faith 
of  Christ,  were  constituted  the  bishops  of  the  congregations, 
planted  by  the  apostles  and  evangelists.  Whereas,  to  suppose 
that  an  apostle,  who,  v/ith  his  fellows  in  that  sacred  college, 
had  received  this  express  commission,  as  the  last  orders  from 
the  mouth  of  his  Master,  "  Go  throughout  all  the  world, 
*'  teach  (rather  convert,  make  disciples yf^xB-nle^vtrctls)  all  nations, 
"  and  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature,"  to  be  confined  to 
the  charge  of  a  particular  flock,  is  to  suppose  him  either  volun- 
tarily to  resign  his  important  commission,  or  to  be  deprived 
of  it,  and  thus  to  undergo  a  real  degradation.  For  beside  the 
difl"erence  in  respect  of  extent  between  these  two  missions,  the 
department  of  an  apostle  is  chiefly  amongst  infidels,  whom  he 
is  commanded  jUMB-Jjevnv  to  convert,  the  department  of  a  bishop 
is  chiefly  among  believers,  whom  he  is  appointed  h^ctrKtiv  to 
teach. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  195 

An  argument  hath  sometimes  been  formed  in  support  of  the 
papal  pretensions,  on  the  ancient  use  of  such  appellations  as 
these  applied  to  Rome,  apostolick  see,  chair,  throne,  and  the 
like.  But  it  is  too  well  known  to  require  illustx-ation,  that 
these  phrases,  though,  in  after  ages,  appropriated  by  the 
bishops  of  Rome  to  their  own  charge,  were,  in  the  first  three 
centuries,  applied  to  all  the  churches  indiscriminately,  in 
which  bishops  had  at  first  been  placed  by  the  apostles.  Such 
were  Ephesus,  Smyrna,  Antioch,  Corinth,  Thessalonica,  Phi- 
lippi.  Afterwards  these  titles  were  still  further  extended  to 
distinguish  the  metropoiitical  churches  throughout  the  chris- 
tian world  from  the  sees  of  their  suffragans.  Of  the  same 
futile  kind  are  the  arguments  drawn  from  the  title  pope^  (a 
Greek  word  signifying  father^  and  from  the  ascription  of 
holiness  and  blessedness  in  the  form  of  addressing  the  bishop 
of  Rome.  These  thiugs,  it  is  well  known  to  all  who  are 
conversant  in  church-history,  were  at  first  common  to  most 
bishops,  especially  metropolitans  and  patriarchs,  and  were 
given,  as  well  as  received,  by  the  Roman  pontiff  himself  ; 
though  afterwards  they  were  gradually,  with  many  other 
things,  arrogated  by  Rome  as  her  peculiar  prerogatives. 

Indeed,  it  is  so  evident  to  those  who  are  ever  so  little  ac- 
quainted with  these  matters,  that  the  true  source  of  the  gran- 
deur of  the  Roman  bishop  was  the  dignity  of  the  place,  and 
not  any  honours  he  derived  from  Peter,  that  to  attempt  to 
illustrate  so  clear  a  point,  would  on  the  one  hand  be,  to  the 
impartial  and  intelligent,  but  a  misspending  of  time,  and 
would,  I  fear,  on  the  other,  have  no  effect  on  persons  whose 
minds  are,  either  by  prejudice  or  interest,  swayed  to  the  oppo- 
site side  of  the  question.  If  the  succession  to  Peter  could  be 
fairly  claimed  by  any,  the  church  of  Antioch,  beyond  all  com- 
parison, would  have  a  preferable  title.  We  have  express  scrip- 
tural evidence  that  Peter,  was  there,  (see  Gal.  ii,  11,)  and  at 
least  as  clear  a  tradition  that  he  was  the  founder  of  that  see. 
I  do  not  say  that  Peter,  if  he  was  the  founder,  could  properly 
be  called  the  bishop  of  Antioch  any  more  than  of  Rome  ; 
but  I  say,  that  in  whatever  sense  he  can  be  styled  bishop  of 
Rome,  we  have  much  better  ground  to  denominate  him  bishop 
of  Antioch. 

Pope  Innocent,  who,  about  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century, 
appears  to  have  been  the  first  who  thought  of  deriving  the 
prerogatives  of  his  see  from  the  apostle  Peter,  acknowledges, 
in  a  letter  to  the  patriarch  of  Antioch,  that  that  church,  as 
well  as  Rome,  had  properly  been  the  see  of  St.  Peter,  and  that 
it  was,  on  that  account,  of  very  great  dignity,  and  entitled  to 
a  very  extensive  jurisdiction  ;  nay,  further,  that  it  yielded  to 


19S  LECTURES  ON 

the  see  of  Rome  only  because  Peter  had  accomplished  there 
what  he  had  begun  at  Antioch.  I  cannot  help  thinking,  how- 
ever, that  this  was  a  dangerous  confession,  made  bj'  Innocent; 
for  it  does  not  seem  so  clear  a  case,  that  it  should  be  the  last 
church  that  the  prince  of  the  apostles  had  founded  and  pos- 
sessed, and  not  the  first,  which  had  the  best  title  to  priority 
in  respect  of  honour  and  power.  I  believe  most  people  would 
think  it  more  reasonable  to  consider  the  first  foundation  of 
the  first  of  the  apostles  as  entitled  to  the  preference,  or  first 
place,  if  there  was  to  be  a  primacy  in  the  church.  Indeed, 
by  the  pontiff's  manner  of  expressing  himself  concerning  this 
great  apostle,  one  would  imagine  he  were  talking  of  a  mere 
modern,  who,  though  settled  at  Antioch  as  bishop  of  the 
place,  had  no  scruple  to  accept  a  call  to  a  better  bishoprick, 
and  therefore  came  soon  afterwards  to  be  translated  (how, 
when,  or  by  whom,  we  know  not)  to  the  metropolis  of  the 
empire. 

No  historical  fact,  however,  can  be  more  evident,  than  that 
the  origin  of  the  superiority  of  one  episcopal  see  over  another 
arose  from  the  secular  division  of  the  empire,  and  from  no 
other  consideration  whatever.  Hence  the  pre-eminence  of  the 
see  of  Rome,  whose  bishop,  before  the  conversion  of  Constan- 
tine,  had  only  the  precedency  among  the  prelates,  as  bishop 
of  the  imperial  city;  but  no  jurisdiction  beyond  the  bounds 
of  the  provinces,  lying  within  the  vicariate  of  Rome,  as  it  was 
called,  which  was  properly  no  patriarchate,  being  but  the  half 
of  the  civil  diocess  of  Italy,  and  considerably  inferiour  in  ex- 
tent to  some  of  the  patriarchates.  In  every  thing  we  may 
observe  the  dignity  of  the  episcopal  see  was  determined  by 
the  rank  which  the  city  itself  held  in  the  empire.  Otherwise 
whv  should  Alexandria  have  been  ranked  as  it  was  before 
Antioch?  The  latter  they  acknowledge  to  have  been  founded 
by  him,  whom  they  denominate  the  prince  of  the  apostles, 
whereas  the  former  was  not  founded  by  any  of  the  apostles : 
its  erection  is  universally  ascribed  to  the  evangelist  Mark. 
But  the  true  reason  is,  that  Alexandria  was  the  second  city 
in  the  Roman  empire,  and  the  prefect  of  that  capital  had  the 
precedency  of  the  prefect  of  Antioch. 

But  above  all,  why  was  not  Jerusalem  vested  with  the  supre- 
macy- Jerusalem,  the  mother  of  churches,  where  our  blessed 
Lord,  by  his  death  and  resurrection,  laid  the  foundations  not 
of  a  particular  church  only,  but  of  the  church  universal?  I  may 
add,  where  the  Holy  Ghost  first  descended  on  the  apostles, 
where  they  were  commanded  to  commence  their  ministry, 
*'  beginning  at  Jerusalem,"  and  whence  the  faith  was  propa- 
gated and  diffused,  as  from  its  fountain,  throughout  all  the 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  19? 

workl.  And  even  with  regard  to  the  particular  church  of  that 
city,  it  was  surely  entitled  to  the  highest  honours,  ina£n)>.:ch 
as  it  was,  in  the  strictest  sense,  lonncied  by  Jesus  Christ  uiai- 
self.  For  on  occasion  of  the  election  of  Matthias,  before  the 
descent  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and,  consequenily,  before  the 
apostles  entered  on  their  office,  the  number  of  disciples  that 
were  convened  there,  probably  not  all  that  were  in  Jerusalem, 
was,  savs  the  sacred  historian,  about  a  hundred  and  twenty. 
And  as  the  foundation  of  that  individual  church  was  laid  by 
him  who  is  the  Lord  and  head  of  the  whole,  so  the  raising  of 
the  superstructure  may  most  justly  be  accounted  the  work  not 
of  one  apostle,  but  of  the  whole  college  of  apostles.  Yet  the 
bishdp  of  Jerusalem,  though  honoured  with  some  special  pri- 
vileges, came  in  fact  to  be  ranked  among  the  patriarchs  only 
in  the  fifth  place,  his  patriarchal  diocess  being,  in  reality,  but 
a  small  part,  taken  from  the  diocess  of  Antioch.  And  if  the 
rejection  of  the  Jews,  on  account  of  their  unbelief,  be  held  a 
good  reason  for  the  rejection  of  Jerusalem  from  being  the 
capital  of  this  spiritual  kingdom,  cujisisting  mosdy  of  tonverts 
from  gentilism  ;  why  was  not  Caesarea,  or,  as  it  was  anciently- 
called,  Straton's  tower,  preferred  beiore  every  other  city ;  con- 
cerning wbkh  we  have  undoubted  evidence,  that  it  was 
honoured  to  be  the  place  where,  by  the  preaching  of  Peter  to 
Cornelius  and  his  friends,  the  door  of  faith  was  first  opened 
to  the  gentiles  ?  Yet  the  bishop  of  thi-:.  Csesarea  never  attained 
any  higher  dignity  than  that  of  meiropolitan. 

What  but  its  new-acquired  importance  raised  the  see  of 
Constantinople,  fonnt^rly  Byzantium,  whose  bishop,  till  the 
city,  was  made  by  Constantine  the  seat  of  empire,  vi'as  suiTra- 
gan  to  the  exarch  of  Heraclea,  to  be  one  of  the  principal 
patriarchates  in  the  christian  world  ;  and  to  which  its  former 
superiour  became,  in  his  turn,  suffragan  ?  That  it  arose  from 
no  other  cause,  is  manifest  from  the  canon  which  first  vested 
this  see  with  that  pre-eminence.  The  canon,  I  mean,  is  the 
third  of  the  council  of  Constantinople,  in  the  year  381,  being 
the  second  ecumenical  co  jmtil.     The  words  are-  rov  f^ev  toi  Kov- 

{■xvlivnTroXeai  f7ri<rK07rov  ly^fiv  ret,  TC^io-^itct  tsj;  r/jM,»;5  fjudct  rov  rs;;  Vi)[^'/ii  nris-xJi- 

^ov.  hx.ro  eivat  oivhv  v-ccv  VufMjv.  "  The  bishop  of  Constantinople 
shall  enjoy  the  honour  of  precedency  next  after  the  bishop  of 
Rome,  because  it  is  new  Rome."  The  first  place  is  given  to 
Rome  as  the  elder  sister,  and  that  frtjm  which  the  empire  s'.ill 
continued  to  be  named.,  The  second  is  given  to  Constanti- 
nople, because  now  an  imperial  city  as  well  as  the  other.  In 
thi-  reason  assigni^d  for  giving  'lie  second  place  to  the  hitter, 
they  clearly  indicate  the  only  reason  then  known  for  giving 
the  first  place  to  the  former.     This  is  still  more  explicitly 


tn  LECTURES  ON 

expressed  in  the  twenty- eighth  canon  of  the  council  of  Chal- 
cedon,  holden  in  451,   being  the  fourth  ecumenical  council. 
It  is  said  to  have  consisted  of  630  bishops,  and,  consequently, 
was  the  most  numerous  that  had  yet  been  assembled.     The 
reason  on  which  the  fathers  ground  their  resolve,  is  thus  ex- 
pressed in  the  canon  :      K«j<  ya^  rut  B-pova  Tyji-^pea-^vjepoi/i  VaifMig    hxro 
^cCTi?iiv$iv  Tijv  -sroXtv  eKstnpi  ej  zrcc]ioei  eiKoloic  x7rodsa'6>Kciiri  rcc  ZTpeTJ^eta,  id   ra 
a.v](»  Q-K.o'TVoi  Ksvuf^ivoi  ot  pv  BsopiM'^ciloi  iTTioriioToii  rcc  i<rx,  zrpea-^eioi  XTrevni/Mvru 
T'/ii  VBCi(i  P*,M,i}?  iyiMJoilM  B-povdj,    evMyiA>i  xpivxvlei;.    rtjv   Ztx.'nXiiu,   s^   orvyKXtflu 
Ti^TiB-siTM  nroXiVj   x^j  ron  e«-&'v  a.TroXu.vnTm  ■ZTpso-^eiav    rjj  zrpia-Bvlepvi  ^acriXt^i 
Fni^)},  ^  £v7a'S  £x.x.X}t!-ioi^tKo!i,  «5  ;x-eir/]]>  f^syci?iiive<r9ci,c  -zs-pxyf^Mo-t,  d'svlepxv  |K.er' 
srMViiv  uTirxp^sTxv- — ''•  Whereas  the  fathers,  with  great  propriety, 
"  bestowed  the  chief  honours  on  the  see  of  Old  Romcy  be- 
*'  CAUSE  IT  WAS  THE  IMPERIAL  CITY,  and  whercas  the  150 
"  (Constantinopolitan)  fathers  beloved  of  God,  actuated  by  the 
"  same  motive,  conferred  the  like  dignity  on  the  most  holy  see 
*' of  New  Rome,  (that  is,  Constantinople)  judging  it  reason- 
"  able,  that  the  city  honoured  to  be  the  seat  of  empire,  and  of 
^  the  senate,   and  equal  in  civil  privileges  with  ancient  royal 
"  Rome,  should  be  equally  distinguished  also  by  ecclesiastical 
"  privileges,  and  enjoy  the  second  place  in  the  church,  being 
*'  next  to  Old  Rome — we  ratify  and  confirm,"  &c.     And  as 
the  council  of  Constantinople  had  given  rank  to  that  patriarch, 
this  of  Chalcedon  proceeded  to  add  jurisdiction.     My  prin- 
cipal reasons  for  adducing  this  passage  are  to  show  first,  that 
the  rank  and  dignity  of  the  several  bishops  was,  at  that  time, 
considered  by  them  as  conferred  by  the  church,  and  not  as 
derived  from  Jesus  Christ,  St.  Peter,  or  the  college  of  apostles, 
none  of  whom  are  so  much  as  mentioned  by  them ;  that  there- 
fore  it  is  of  human,  not  of  divine  institution  :   and,  secondly, 
that  the  only  reason  assigned  for  the  preference  given  is  the 
dignity  of  the  city,  and  the  rank  it  bears  in  the  empire.     It  is. 
to  no  purpose  to  urge,  that  the  bishop  of  Rome  could  never 
be  prevailed  on  to  ratify  this  canon  of  Chalcedon,  It  obtained, 
notwithstanding  his  opposition,  was  engrossed  in  the  acts  of 
the  council,  and  remained  u  rule  in  the  east  ever  after.     It 
was  no  wonder,   that  the  sudden  rise  of  this  new  dignitary 
roused  the  jealousy  of  Rome.     Constantinople,  from  a  place 
of  no  consideration,  was,  in  half  a  century,  become  the  prin^ 
cipal  see  in  the  east.     An  obscure  suffragan  was  made  chief 
o-f  the  Greek  patriarchs,  and  next  in  rank  to  the  Roman  pon- 
tiff.    Since  the  removal  of  the  seat  of  empire,  Constantinople 
was  grown  a  great  and  flourishing  city,   and  still  appeared  to 
be  increasing  ;  Rome  was  as  evidently  on  the  decline.     It  was 
natural  for  the   pope  to  argue  in  this  manner  :  "  If  things 
'*  proceed  thus,  can  it  be  doubted,  that  a  bishoprick,  scarcely 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  I£f9 

**  named  in  former  ages,  which  has,  with  so  little  ceremony, 
"  been  at  one  step  exalted  above  all  the  patriarchates  of  the 
*'  east,  and  had  the  second  place  in  the  church  assigned  it,  will, 
"  at  the  next,  with  as  little  ceremony,  be  raised  above  the 
"  Roman  see,  and  made  the  first  ?"  There  appeared  some 
danger  in  overlooking  tl^ese  alterations,  and  therefore,  under 
pretence  of  defending  the  rights  of  the  sees  of  Alexandria 
and  Antioch,  and  the  canons  of  Nice,  which,  by  the  way,  had 
not  a  syllable  relating  to  the  question,  he  warded  off  the  evil 
which  he  suspected  it  would  bring  upon  Rome.  It  is,  howe- 
ver, sufficient  for  my  purpose  to  show,  what  may  be  justly 
called  the  sense  of  the  universal  church  at  that  time  on  this 
article  ;  for  the  above  canon  was  subscribed  by  ail  the  bishops 
of  that  numerous  council,  with  the  exception  of  a  very  few, 
who  favoured  Rome.  Allow  me  to  add,  that  these  councils, 
the  Constantinopolitan  and  the  Chalcedonian,  are  two  of  the 
four  which  pope  Gregory  the  Great  declared  he  held  in  equal 
veneration  with  the  four  gospels,  and  which  are  to  this  day  in 
the  highest  authority  in  the  Romish  church.  I  pass  the  consi- 
deration of  the  validity  of  those  canons,  leaving  it  to  the  dis- 
cussion of  scholastick  sophisters  and  Roman  canonists.  I  regard 
them  solely  as  the  unanimous  testimony  of  the  leading  men, 
and,  consequently,  of  the  church  in  those  periods,  concerning 
the  source  of  the  prerogatives  enjoyed  by  particular  sees,  and 
the  grounds  on  which  they  were  bestowed.  And  in  this  view 
they  are  certainly  of  the  greatest  moment. 

Indeed,  so  notorious  it  is,  that  the  dignity  and  authority  of 
the  sees  were  almost  entirely  correspondent  to  the  dignity  and 
authority  of  the  civil  governours  of  the  place,  that  when  the 
emperour  judged  it  proper  to  divide  a  province  into  two, a  thing 
which  often  happened,  giving  them  separate  magistrates  ;  the 
ecclesiastical  polity  underwent  the  like  alteration,  and  the 
bishop  of  the  new  metropolis  was  raised  to  the  dignity  of  a 
metropolitan.  The  provincial  churches  also  were  divided,  and 
all  those  situated  within  the  province  newly  erected,  were 
withdrawn  from  their  old  metropolitan.  This  would  not  fail 
to  create  great  animosities  and  discontents  among  the  clergy, 
as  well  as  to  prove  a  strong  incentive  to  ambitious  prelates, 
who  had  interest  at  court,  to  apply  for  such  a  division  of  the 
province,  as  would  raise  their  city  to  a  metropolis.  But  as  this 
practice  was  attended  with  gross  inconveniences,  and  produc- 
tive of  very  great  abuses,  a  timely  check  was  put  to  such  alte- 
rations in  the  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction,  by  the  council  of 
'Chalcedon,  that  very  council  which  established  the  preroga- 
tives of  the  Constantinopolitan  patriarch.  Nothing,  however, 
can  be  more  evident,   or  is  more  ujaiversally  admitted  by  all 


^Oi  LECTURES  ON 

who  know  any  thing  of  these  nlatters,  than  that  the  whole  fa^ 
brick  of  ecclesiastical  government  was  raised  on  the  model  of 
the  civil  polity,  that  the  very  manner  in  which  power  was  dis- 
tributed, and  apportioned  to  the  great  officers  of  the  state,  was, 
in  most  cases,  servilel}^  copied  by  the  rulers  of  the  church. 
Nay,  the  very  erection  of  their  dignities,  and  the  investiture 
of  the  dignitaries,  were  generally  effected  by  the  imperial 
edict ;  for  those  never  hesitated  to  acknowledge  the  power  of 
the  emperour  in  these  matters  who  were  themselves  benefited 
by  his  power.  Afterwards,  indeed,  when  perfectly  secured  by- 
long  possession,  tht  possessors  were  not  so  willing  to  acknow- 
ledge the  source  whence  their  wealth  and  honours  were  oi-igi- 
nally  derived. 

In  regard  to  Rome  iii  particular,  it  is  astonishing  to  think 
how  suddenly,  upon  the  establishment  of  Christianity,  its  bi»- 
shops  arose,  by  the  munificence  of  the  emperours,  and  the 
misjudged  devotion  of  some  great  and  opulent  proselytes, 
especially  among  the  ladies,  from  a  state  of  obscurity  to  the 
most  envied  opulence  and  grandeur.  Ammianus  Marcellinus, 
a  pagan  and  contemporary  writer,  speaking  of  the  horrible  con- 
flict betwixt  Damasus  and  Ursinus  for  the  episcopal  chair  of 
Rome,  which  happened  about  the  middle  of  the  fourth  cen- 
tury, a  conflict  in  which  the  prefect  of  the  city  was  compelled 
to  take  refuge  in  the  suburbs,  and  which  ended  in  the  cruel 
massacre  of  a  hundred  and  thirty-seven  people  in  the  basilick 
of  Liberius,  says,  in  order  to  account,  in  some  measure,  for 
the  violence  and  fury  with  which  this  contest  had  been  con- 
ducted, "  I  must  acknowledge,  that  when  I  reflect  on  the  pomp 
"  attending  that  dignity,  I  am  not  surprised,  that  those  who 
"  are  fond  of  parade  should  quarrel  and  fight,  and  strain  every 
"  nerve  to  attain  this  office,  since  they  are  sure,  if  they  succeedj 
"  to  be  enriched  with  the  presents  of  the  matrons,  to  appear 
"  abroad  no  more  on  foot,  but  in  stately  chariots,  and  gorge- 
"  ously  attired,  to  keep  sumptuous  tables,  nay,  and  to  surpass 
"  kings  themselves  in  the  splendour  and  m<ignificence  of  their" 
"  entertainments.  But  how  happy  would  they  be,  if  despising 
*'  the  voluptuousness  and  show  of  the  city,  which  they  plead 
"  in  excuse  for  their  luxury,  they  followed  the  example  of 
"  some  bishops  in  the  province^.,  who,  by  the  temperance  and 
"  frugality  of  their  diet,  the  poverty  and  plainness  of  their 
"  dress,  the  unassuming  modesty  of  their  looks,  approve 
"  themselves  pure  and  upright  to  the  eternal  God,  and  all  his 
*'  genuine  worshippers*."  I  bring  this  quotation  the  raiher, 
because  it  affords  the  testimony  of  a  heathen,  (who,  therefore^ 

*  Lib.  xxvii.  cap.  3. 


^CLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  201 

i^annot  be  supposed  partial  to  the  cause  of  Christianity)  that  to 
■^vhatever  pitch  of  pride  and  arrogance  the  church  potentates, 
in  the  great  cities,  were  now  arrived,  there  were  not  wanting 
christian  pastors  in  the  country  whose  lives  did  honour  to  their 
profession,  showing,  that  the  spirit  of  the  meek  and  humble 
Jesus  was  not  totally  extinct  among  those  who  were  denomi- 
nated his  followers  and  servants.  Let  me  add,  that  the  rea- 
diness with  which  that  author  gives  so  honourable  a  testimony 
to  the  temper  and  manners  of  several  ministers  of  Christ, 
raises  hini  above  the  suspicion  of  being  actuated  by  malice  to 
the  cause,  iri  the  reproaches  lie  throws  on  the  ostentation  and 
sensuality  of  others. 

Iri  confirmation,  if  it  be  thought  necessary,  of  the  account 
given  by  an  infidel,  of  the  grandeur,  and  even  riiore  than  royal 
state,  in  which  the  Roman  pontiff  then  lived,  I  shall  add  what 
is  told  by  Jerom,  a  christian  writer,  and  a  father  of  the  church, 
■who  was  also  a  contemporary  and  an  intimate  friend  of  the 
bishop.  Prsetextatus,  a  noblerrian  of  the  highest  rank,  and 
honoured  with  the  greatest  and  most  lucrative  employ- 
ments of  the  empire,  but  zealously  attached  to  paganism,  con- 
Versing  once  familiarly  with  Damasus,  the  sticcessful  candi- 
date^ on  the  subject  of  their  different  religions,  said  to  the 
prelate,  in  a  sort  of  pleasantry,  "  Make  me  but  bishop  of 
*'  Rome,  and  I  will  turn  christian  immediately."  Now  it  de- 
serves to  be  1-emarked,  that  Christianity,  considered  as  an 
establishment,  supported  by  legal  sanctions,  and  enjoying  the 
countenance  of  the  magistrate  was  then  only  of  about  fifty 
years  standing;  It  was  no  longer  since  the  church  had  emer- 
ged put  of  obscurity,  and  been  released  from  a  most  bloody 
persecution,  begun  by  Dioclesian,  about  the  beginning  of  the 
century,  and  continued  with  little  interruption  for  ten  succes- 
sive years.  That  in  so  short  a  conapass  this  episcopal  see 
should  have  mounted  almost  to  the  summit  of  earthly  gran- 
deur, would  be  looked  upon,  if  not  so  amply  attested,  as  a 
thing  incredible. 

But  whatever  its  wealth  and  splendour  rriight  be  even  at  this 
early  period,  its  power  was  yet  but  in  its  infancy.  It  is,  how- 
ever, certain,  that  a  remarkable  superiority  in  respect  of  pro- 
perty, is  the  surest  foundation  on  which  a  permanent  domi- 
nion can  be  raiised.  But  to  account,  in  some  measure,  for  the 
suddenness  of  this  acquisition  of  riches,  it  ought  to  be  ob- 
served, that  it  had  been,  long  before,  customary  for  all  chris- 
tians that  were  capable,  but  especially  the  more  wealty,  to 
make  liberal  offerings  to  the  church,  as  on  other  occasions,  so 
particularly  at  the  celebration  of  the  more  solemn  festi^s^ 
■^tiese  offerings,  after  supplying  the  needs  of  the  chui'chj'  and' 

c  c 


20a  LECTURES  ON 

supporting  its  ministers,  were  understood,  at  first,  to  be  de* 
voted  to  the  relief  of  the  distressed  and  needy,  strangers,  or- 
phans, widows,  prisoners,  and  sick.  Accordingly,  with  these 
truly  pious  and  charitable  donations,  the  bishops  of  Rome 
used,  in  earlier  times,  in  the  first  place,  to  relieve  the  poor 
of  their  own  church,  and  when  that  end  was  attained,  to  send 
the  overplus  to  other  churches,  where  the  poor  were  nume- 
rous, the  people  in  general  less  affluent,  and,  consequently, 
the  offerings  insufficient. 

Of  this  humane  and  generous  practice,  the  duration  was 
only  whilst  the  church  itself  remained  in  affliction  and  obscu- 
rity. It  may  appear  a  paradox,  but  it  is  too  well  confirnaed 
by  experience,  that  nothing  is  a  greater  enemy  to  generosity, 
than  the  unexpected  acquisition  of  boundless  wealth.  This 
proves  almost  invariably  the  parent  of  ambition.  And  when 
ambition  comes  to  supplant  charity,  and  a  pompous  species 
of  superstition  to  be  substituted  for  rational  devotion,  the 
poor  are  forgotten  on  all  sides.  1'he  exaltation  of  the  priest- 
hood, the  exteriour  glory  of  the  sacred  service,  magnificent 
temples,  richly  furnished  and  decorated,  gorgeous  vestments^ 
with  whatever  can  dazzle  the  senses  of  those  present  at  the 
publick  ministrations,  appear  even  to  the  bulk  of  the  people 
the  noblest  object  of  their  liberality,  as  tending  more  than  any 
other  to  the  honour  of  God,  and  the  advancement  of  religion. 
In  consequence  of  this  gradual  change  in  men's  sentiments, 
the  oblations  made  to  the  church  would  be  gradually  alienated 
from  the  primitive  purpose,  not  onl)'"  with  impunity,  but  even, 
with  general  approbation.  Though  the  support  of  the  minis- 
ters, in  many  places,  did  not  nov/,  as  formerly,  depend  on  the 
voluntary  contributions  of  the  people,  all  the  principal  sees 
having  fixed  revenues  and  temporalities  annexed  to  them,  the 
ministers  were  still,  by  a  kind  of  prescription,  or  immemori- 
al custom,  considered  as  having  a  personal  interest  in  the  sa- 
cred offerings.  And  though  these  were  not  wanted  for  the, 
supply  of  the  necessaries,  or  even  of  the  conveniences  of  life, 
there  is  no  imaginable  limit  can  be  set  to  its  luxuries,  and  for 
the  supply  of  these  there  would  ever  be  occasion.  The  thoughts, 
of  these  upstart  princes  would  then  naturally  fix  on  splendid 
equipages,  numerous  retinues,  princely  apparel,  expensive  ta- 
bles, superb  palaces,  and  whatever  else  couid  feed  their  vani- 
ty, and  put  them  upon  the  level  (as  in  a  few  cities,  Rome  and 
Constantinople  in  particular,  they  were  quickly  put  upon  the 
level)  with  the  greatest  monarchs. 

But  to  take  a  brief  survey  of  the  principal  causes  which  con- 
tri hinted  to  raise  the  papacy  to  that  zenith  of  glory,  which  it 
actually  reached,  shall  be  reserved  for  the  subject  of  some 
other  lectures.     In  this  I  have  only  examined  the  foundation. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  203 

LECTURE  XIIL 


AN  my  last  lecture,  I  entered  on  the  consideratron  of  the  rise 
of  papal  dominion.  I  showed  that  the  pretensions  made  by 
papists,  in  regard  to  the  distinguishing  prerogatives  of  the 
apostle  Peter,  and  in  regard  to  the  title  which  the  Roman 
pontiff  derives  from  him,  are  equally  without  foundation  :  that 
neither  had  that  apostle  any  such  prerogatives  as  they  ascribe 
to  him,  nor  has  the  bishop  of  Rome  a  better  title  to  be  called 
his  successour  than  any  other  pastor  in  the  christian  church.  I 
took  notice,  that  the  very  first  pontiff,  who  advanced  this  plea 
as  the  foundation  of  his  primacy  and  power,  lived  no  earlier 
than  the  fifth  century  ;  I  showed  particularly,  that  the  true 
origin  of  the  pope's  supremacy  was  the  dignity  of  the  see,  and 
not  of  its  founder,  the  wealch  and  temporal  advantages  deriv- 
ed from  the  congregation  of  that  great  metropolis,  and  not 
any  spiritual  authority  and  jurisdiction,  transmitted  from  the 
fisherman  of  Galilee,  who  was  styled  the  apostle,  not  of  the 
nations,  but  of  the  circumcision.  I  showed  further,  that  this 
account  of  the  origin  of  Romish  dominion  perfectly  corres- 
ponds with  the  model  that  the  church  very  soon  assumed  in 
conformity  to  the  civil  constitution  of  the  empire  ;  the  digni- 
ty and  secular  power  of  the  magistrate,  in  every  city,  especi- 
ally in  every  capital,  almost  invariably  determining  the  dignity 
and  spiritual  jurisdiction  of  its  pastor.  Hence  the  different 
degrees  among  the  biaipps,  of  suffragan,  primate,  or  me- 
tropolitan, and  exarch.  Hence  also  among  those  of  the  same 
class,  the  exarchs,  a  lew,  who  presided  in  the  principal  cities 
of  the  empire,  such  as  Rome,  Constantinople,  Alexandria, 
and  Antioch,  were  dignified  with  the  title  of  patriarch.  And 
even  among  these,  the  precedency  was  always  regulated  by  the 
rank  of  their  respective  prefects.  To  these,  indeed,  was  ad- 
ded Jerusalem,  from  respect  to  the  place  where  Christ  had  con- 
summated his  ministry,  and  our  redemption  had  been  accom- 
plished, that  is,  where  expiation  had  been  made  for  the  sin  of 
man  by  the  sacrifice  of  the  Son  of  God,  where  the  first  fruits 
of  the  resurrection  had  been  produced  in  him  who  vvas*oth 
the  founder  and  the  finisher  of  the  faith,  where  the  Holy  Spi* 


$04  LECTURES  ON 

rit  was  first  given,  and  whence  the  gospel  issued,  as  from  its 
fountain,  to  bless,  with  its  salutary  streams,  the  remotest 
parts  of  the  habitable  world.  But  this  was  the  only  city  which 
v/as  honoured  with  any  pre-eminence  from  other  considerations, 
than  such  as  were  merely  secular.  And  even  Jerusalem  came 
but  in  the  fifth  place. 

1  observed  before,  that  power  has  a  sort  of  attractive  force, 
which  gives  it  a  tendency  to  accumulate,  insomuch  that  what, 
in  the  beginning,  is  a  distinction  barely  perceptible,  grows,  in 
process  of  time,  a  most  remarkable  disparity.  In  every  new 
and  doubtful  case  that  may  occur,  the  bias  of  the  imagination 
is  in  favour  of  him  who  occupies  the  higher  place,  were  the 
superiority  ever  so  inconsiderable.  And  what  was  originally 
no  more  than  precedency  in  rank,  becomes  at  length  a  real  su- 
periority  in  power.  The  effect  will  be  considerably  accelerated, 
if  superiour  opulence  join  its  aid  in  producing  it.  This  was 
eminently  the  case  with  Rome,  the  wealthiest  see,  as  well  as 
the  most  respectable,  because  the  seat  of  empire,  of  any  in 
the  church. 

But  it  may  be  urged  on  the  other  side,  that  when  the  im- 
perial throne  was  transferred  from  Rome  to  Constantinople, 
it  might  have  been  expected,  that  this  latter  place  would  rise 
to  a  still  greater  eminence  than  the  former.  That  indeed,  not- 
withstanding its  obscurity  for  ages,  it  did  rise  to  very  great 
eminence,  in  consequence  of  the  translation  of  the  seat  of 
empire,  is  itself  a  very  strong  confirmation  of  the  doctrine 
here  maintained.  That  though  the  youngest  of  the  patriar- 
chal sees,  it  did,  through  the  favour  of  the  emperours,  arise 
to  such  distinguished  grandeur  and  authority,  as  long  to  ap? 
pear  a  formidable  rival  to  haughty  Rome,  and  often  to  awake 
her  most  jealous  attention,  is  a  point  which  will  not  be  dis- 
puted by  an)"  who  is  but  moderately  conversani  in  ecclesiastick 
history.  But  then  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  Rome  had  been 
a  church  in  the  highest  estimation  for  ages  before  the  name  of 
Constantinople  had  been  heard.  Ai4  as  for  Byzantium,  the 
name  by  which  the  place  had  formerly  been  known,  it  never 
was  a  see  of  any  note  or  consideratron.  In  regard  to  the 
Romans,  however  uncertain  it  may  be  who  it  was  that  first 
preached  the  gospel  to  them,  and  founded  a  church  among 
them,  there  can  be  no  doubt  of  the  antiquity  of  this  event, 
since  Paul,  as  we  learn  from  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  on  his 
first  coming  prisoner  to  Rome,  found  a  church  there  already 
planted  ;  and  since,  in  one  of  his  longest  letters,  manifestly 
wri'ten  some  time  before,  and  directed  to  that  church,  he 
mentions  their  faith  as  even,  at  that  early  period,  celebrate^ 
throughout  the  world.    Rome  may  therefore  be  justly  reckon-^ 


ECCLESIASTICAI.  HISTORY.  205 

^d  neaHy  coeval  with  the  oldest  gentile  churches.  Certain  i 
is,  that  the  tradition  which  prevailed  most  concerning  thi 
church,  in  the  days  of  Constaiuine,  and  ior  a  considerabfe 
time  before,  was,  that  it  had  been  founded  by  the  two  apostles, 
Peter  and  Paul.  These  were  considered  as  the  most  emirent 
in  the  apostolical  college,  the  one  a^  the  doctor  of  the  J-ws, 
the  other  of  the  Gentiles  ;  the  people  therefore  seem-d  to 
think,  that  it  v^as  an  honour  due  to  the  n>stress  and  capital  of 
the  world,  to  believe,  that  she  had  hac  a  principal  share  in 
the  ministry  of  both.  Here  was  an  original  disadvantage, 
that  Constantinople,  or  New  Rome,  as  she  was  sometimes 
palled,  laboured  under,  which  it  was  impossiMe  lor  her  ever 
Jo  surmgunt.  Antiquity  has  great  influence  o\  every  human 
establishment,  but  especially  on  those  of  a  reigious  nature. 
What  advantage  Old  Rome  derived  hence,  whe^  sihe  found  it 
convenient  in  supporting  her  claims,  to  change  ht-  gi-ound,  as 
it  were,  and  rear  the  fabrick  of  spiritual  despotism  not  as  for- 
merly, on  the  dignity  of  the  world's  metropolis  nd  human 
constitutions,  but  on  divine  right,  transmitted  tl-ough  the 
prince  of  the  apostles,  is  too  well  known  to  need  a^articular 
illustration.  And  though  the  younger  sister  soon  leaiit  to  imi- 
tate the  elder,  and  claim  an  origin  and  antiquity  neay  equal, 
pretending,  on  I  know  not  what  grounds,  to  have  bee  found- 
ed by  the  apostle  Andrew,  the  brother  of  Peter,  thyght  to 
be  the  elder  brother,  and  who  was  certainly,  as  we  lejn  from 
John's  gospel*,  a  disciple  of  Christ  before  him  ;  yet'ie  no- 
torious recenc)'^,  the  suddenness,  and  the  too  maniiestjource 
of  her  splendour  and  power,  rendered  it  impracticable  »r  her, 
without  arrogance,  ever  to  vie  with  the  elder  sister  in  h-  high 
pretensions. 

But  with  the  two  causes  above-mentioned,  namely,  e  su- 
periour  dignity  of  the  city  of  Rome,  and  the  opulence  P  her 
church,  there  were  several  others  which  co-operated  in  is'mg 
her  to  that  amazing  greatness  and  authority,  at  which,  i  the 
course  of  a  few  centuries,  she  arrived.  To  enumere  all 
would  be  impossible.  I  shall  therefore  only  select  a  f /  of 
the  principal  of  themf 

The  first  I  shall  take  notice  of  is  the  vigilant  and  unmit- 
ted  policy  she  early  showed  in  improving  every  advanta^for 
her  own  aggrandizement,  which  rank  and  wealth  coulbe- 
stow.  Scarcely  had  Christianity  received  the  sanction  o.he 
legislature,  erecting  it  into  a  sort  of  political  establishivit, 
before  the  bishops  of  this  high-minded  city  began  to  tnteiin 
the  towering  thoughts  of  erecting  for  themselves  a  new  xt 

*  John  J,  41,  423  42-  ' 


^06  LECTURES  ON 

k  monarchy,  a  spiritual  domination  over  their  brethren,  the 
"Aembers  of  the  church,  which  might  in  time  be  rendered  '^ini- 
vWsal,  analogous  to  the  secular  authority  lodged  in   the  em- 
-perours  over  th«  subjects  of  the  empire.     The  distin^rtions  al- 
ready introduced,  of  presbyter,  bishop,  primate,  and  (which 
soon  followed)  patriarch,  seemed  naturally  to  pave  the  way 
for   iv     These   distinctions,   too,    having  taken   the  sr  origin- 
from  the  civil  distit^.tions  that  obtained  in  regard  t(>  the  vil-. 
lages,  towns,  and  cii>es,  that  were  the  seats  of  these  different 
orders,  seemed  to  furbish  a  plausible  argument  from  analogy, 
that  the  bishop  of  the  capital  of  the  whole  should  have  an  as- 
cendant over  the  exarchs  of  the  civil  diocesses  into  which  it 
was  divided,  sinilar  to  that  which  every  exarch  enjoyed  over 
the   metropolians  of  the  provinces  within  his  diocei>s,  or  ex- 
archate, andA^hich  every  metropolitan  exercised  over  his  suf- 
fragans, theoishops  of  his  province,  and  similar  to  that  which 
the  emperpir  himself  exercised  over  all  the  membeifs  of  the 
empire,     ^t,  by  Constantine's  establishment,  the  bishop  of 
Rome  in  ytrictness  was  not  so  much  as  an  exarch  ;  the  civil 
diocess  o/Italy  having  been,  on  account  of  its  greater  popu- 
lousness/nd  opulence,  divided  into  two  parts,  called  vicari- 
ates, or,lcarages  ;  the  vicariate  of  Rome  containing  ten  pro- 
vinces, nd  including  the  islands,  Sicily,  Corsica,  and  Sar- 
dinia, uder  the  bishop  of  Rome  ;  and  the  vicariate  of  Italy 
contaiivg  seven  provinces,  under  the  bishop  of  Milan.     In 
defere]|e,  however,  to  a  name  which  was  become  .'30  venera- 
ble as  |at  of  Rome,  the  precedency,  or  as  it  was  also  called, 
the  priiacy,  of  its  pastor,  seems  to  have  been  very  early,  and 
very  gnerally,  admitted  in  the  church.     But  that  for  some 
ages  ijthing  further  was  admitted,  would  have  been  at  this 
day  Jversally  acknowledged  an  indisputable  historical  fact, 
had  nc  many  learned  and  indefatigable  writers  found  it  their 
interc  to  exert  all  their  abilities  to  perplex  and  darken  it.    It 
was  (jficult,  however,  for  wealth  and  splendour,  the  genuine 
pareii  of  ambition,   to  rest  satisfied  with  so  trifling  a  pre- 
emiiice. 

Bides,  many  fortunate  incidents,  as  the  minions  of  Rome 
no  ftibt  thought  them,  contributed  greatly  to  assist  and  for- 
warder ambitious  schemes.  The  council  of  Sardica,  about 
the  Iddle  of  the  fourth  century,  at  the  time  that  the  Arian 
conAversy  inflamed  and  divided  the  whole  christian  commu- 
nity this  council  I  say)  after  the  oriental  bishops  were  with- 
draw, was,  by  Osius  bishop  of  Cord.ova,  a  zealous  defender 
of  Ithanasius,  and  a  firm  friend  of  J  ulius,  bishop  of  Rome, 
wfwas  on  the  same  side  with  him  in  the  great  controversy, 
tW agitated  with  such  furious  zeal,  was  induced  to  make  a 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  207 

canon,  ord«eringj  that  if  any  bishop  should  think  himself  un- 
jusdy  condemned  by  his  comprovincials  and  metropolitan,  his 
judges  should  acquaint  the  bishop  of  Rome,  who  might  either 
confirm  their  judgment,  or  order  the  cause  to  be  re-examined 
by  some  of  the  neighoouring  bishops.  In  this  Osius  had  evi- 
dently a  double  "view.  One  view  was  to  confer  an  honour  on 
his  friend  Julius,  the  other  to  give  an  additiotial  security  to 
the  clergy  of  his  own  side.  In  those  times  of  violence  and 
party  rage,  bisho.ps  who,  on  tiie  controverted  points,  happen- 
ed to  be  of  a  diif  erent  side  from  their  colleagues  in  the  same 
province,  and  especially  from  the  primate,  were  sometimes, 
for  no  other  reasoLi,  very  tumukuously  and  irregularly  deposed. 
A  revisal  of  this  l:ind  seemed  then  at  least  to  secure  the  final 
determination  infjivourof  the  orthodox,  (an  epithet  which  in. 
church  history  coreimonly  expresses  a  concurrence  in  opinion 
•with  the  majority)  whose  doctrine  was  at  that  time  vigorously 
supported  by  the  pope.  This  end,  however,  though  probably 
the  principal,  it  dotis  not  appear  to  have  answered.  The  east- 
ern bishops  paid  no  regard  to  the  acts  of  a  synod,  from  which 
they  thought  they  h,ad  the  justest  reasons  to  separate  them- 
selves. Nor  was  it  ever  accounted,  by  the  African  bishops, 
of  authority  sufficierit  for  establishing  a  custom  so  totally  re.- 
pugnant  to  ancient  praciice,  and  so  subversive  of  the  stand- 
ing discipline  of  the  church. 

But  the  popes,  loE<g  after  these  disputes  were  terminated, 
well  knew  how  to  ava  d  themselves  of  a  canon  so  favourable  to 
the  exaltation  of  thei  r  see.  Not  many  years  afterwards,  Va- 
lentinian,  the  more  effectually  and  speedily  to  crush  the  dis- 
sensions and  schisms  that  obtained,  in  his  time,  among  the 
prelates,  especially  in  Italy,  and  the  west,  enacted  a  law,  em- 
powering the  bishop  of  Rome  to  examine  and  judge  odier 
bishops,  that  religiou«5  and  ecclesiastical  disputes  might  not 
be  decided  by  profane  and  secular  judges,  but  by  a  christian 
pontiff,  and  his  colleagues.  For  this  immunity,  and  the  pow- 
er thus  conferred  on  the  order,  a  considerable  number  of  bi- 
shops, mostly  indeed  1{  alian,  soon  after  synodically  convened 
at  Rome,  expressed  a  grateful  sense  of  the  ernperour's  gene- 
rosity and  indulgence.  The  opinion,  that  the  order  had  a  su- 
periour,  even  a  divine,  ;right  to  be  independent  of  the  civil 
powers,  a  notion  so  prevalent  some  ages  afterwards,  had  not 
yet  been  broached.  Ihe  single  agreeable  circumstance,  that 
the  imperial  edict  gave  ,;m  exemption  to  the  clergy  from  the 
power  of  laymen,  made  them  overlook  a  very  fatal  circum- 
stance in  it,  which  was,  it  s  tendency  to  enslave  the  whole  or- 
der, (not  to  say  the  christian  community)  by  subjecting  them 
to  the  tyranny  of  one  of  their  own  number.     Bat  the  bitter 


■Ma  LECTURES  OM 

was  surmounted  by  the  sweet,  or  more  properly,  the  poiso^ 
was  ^5^rediiy  svvaUowed,  as  it  was  hidden  under  a  vehicle  ex- 
tremely pal-ttable.  But  no  advantage,  once  obtained,  was  ever 
overlooked  by  that  politick  and  watchful  power. 

It  is  tvident,  that  neither  the  canon  of  Sardica,  nor  the 
imperial  rescript,  produced  at  first  much  effect  beyond  Italy, 
and  its  immediate  dependencies.  For  a  long  time  no  regard 
was  paid  in  die  east,  or  even  in  Africa,  to  these  new  regula- 
tions. And  their  influence  over  the  clergy  in  the  west,  it 
must  be  owned,  advanced  by  very  slow  degrees.  The  subor- 
dination of  bishops  to  their  own  metropolitan,  along  with  the 
other  comprovincial  bishops,  and  of  metropolitans  to  their 
own  exarch,  with  the  other  diocesan  prelates,  had  by  this 
time  been  so  well  established,  that  it  Was  no  easy  matter  to 
remove  foundations  so  firmly  laid.  Indeed,  about  thirty-foui^ 
years  afterwards,  in  the  pontificate  of  Damasus,  the  primi- 
tive order  was  expressly  restored;,  and  the  canon  of  Sardica 
virtually  revoked  by  a  council  assembled  at  Constantinople, 
greatly  more  numerous,  and  held  for  many  ages  in  much  high- 
er estimaiion,  than  the  council  of  Sardica^ 

One  thing,  however,  in  the  policy  of  Rome,  to  which  they 
sacredly  adhered,  was  never  to  lose  sight  of  any  privilege  or 
advantage  once  obtained^  never  to  be  disheartened  at  any  par- 
ticular check.  Or  present  want  of  success,  in  asserting  a  right, 
but  carefully  to  watch  their  opportunity,  and  anew  to  urge  a 
plea  that  appeared  favourable  to  their  pretensions,  however 
often  they  had  been  baffled  in  urging  it  before.  This  perse- 
(verance  never  failed,  on  some  occasion  or  other,  to  be  of  use 
to  their  cause.  And  one  instance  of  success  (the  increase  of 
the  ignorance  and  superstition  of  the  people  keeping  pace  with 
the  superiority  of  the  Roman  pontiffs)  did  them  more  service, 
than  twenty  defeats  did  them  hurt. 

To  this  unabated  perseverance  they  added  another  maxim, 
namely,  to  make  the  raising  of  the  papal  power  their  primary 
object,  to  which  it  behoved  every  othtr  consideration  to  give 
way.  As  this  showed  itself  ort  numberless  occasions,  so  on 
none  more  eminently  than  on  the  difference  which  arose  be- 
twixt the  eastern  churches  and  the  western,  on  the  subject  of 
^Acacius.  This  Constantinopolitan  pontiff,  who  lived  towards 
the  end  of  the  fifth  century,  had,  in  some  of  those  absurd  and 
unintelligible  logomachies,  with  which  the  christian  world,  in 
those  ages,  was  without  intermission  pestered,  taken  the  side 
opposite  to  that  espoused  by  the  Roman  pontiff.  The  conse- 
quence was,  they  first  disputed,  and,  by  a  very  usual  progress, 
from  disputing  they  came  to  quarrelling,  and  from  quarrelling 
to  an-  open  breach.     These  holy  priests,  at  last,  most  piously/ 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY*  ^09 

^liccDirditig  to  the  fashion  of  the  times,  abused,  cursed,  and  ex- 
tommunicated  each  other.  The  Roman  bishop,  indeed,  at 
this  time,  made  a  bold  attempt  for  surpassing  all  that  his  pre- 
decessours  had  enterprised  hitherto.  He  summoned  before 
himself,  and  a  synod  of  Italian  bishops,  who  were  his  depend- 
ants, and,  on  non-appearance,  tried,  condemned,  and  deposed 
a  patriarch,  nay,  the  first  patriarch  of  the  east,  an  order  over 
which  even  the  insatiable  ambition  of  that  restless  power  had 
never,  till  then,  dared  to  claim  any  jurisdiction.  The  reci- 
procal anathemas  followed  of  course.  This  produced  a  most 
memorable  schism  between  the  oriental  churches  and  the  oc- 
cidental, a  schism  which  continued  for  no  less  than  five  and 
thirty  years,  and  subsisted  through  no  fewer  than  five  succes- 
sive pontificates.  The  seeds  of  the  dissension  may  be  said  to 
have  been  sown  in  the  time  of  pope  Simplicius.  It  was  by 
his  successour,  Felix  the  second,  that  the  patriarch  was  cited, 
judged,  and  deposed. 

Though  it  was  impossible  that  such  exti-avagant  jjroceed-* 
ings  should  take  effect,  in  opposition  to  the  emperour,  and  all 
the  oriental  churches,  they  showed  but  too  clearly  to  what 
height  of  pride  and  arrogance  the  boundless  and  ill-judged  pro- 
fusion of  former  emperours,  senators,  matrons,  and  opulent 
cities,  had  already  raised  this  novel  but  formidable  power. 
On  this  there  ensued  immediately  a  division  of  the  church  into 
two  :  the  west  adhering  to  the  pope,  and  the  east  declaring  for 
the  patriarch,  both  obstinately  refusihg  to  communicate  with 
each  other.  It  was  but  too  visible,  by  the  sophistical  evasions 
and  subterfuges,  which  the  Roman  pontiff,  and  his  immediate 
successour,  employed  in  the  manifestoes  published  to  apologize 
to  the  world  for  this  conduct,  that  they  began  to  be  apprehen*. 
sive  lest  the  papal  power  had  been  stretched  too  far,  and  be- 
yond what  the  world  was  yet  prepared  to  bear.  For  this  rea- 
son they  were  fain  to  vindicate  it  on  principles  which  the  see 
of  Rome  has  now,  for  several  ages,  absolutely  disclaimed* 
But  what  was  to  be  done  ?  They  had  gone  too  far  to  retreatf 
without  giving  a  mortal  wound  to  all  their  high  pretensionsi 
And  to  persiist,  had  the  appearance  of  entailing  a  perpetual 
schism  on  the  church.  This  last  effect,  however,  was,  on  many 
accounts,  rather  to  be  hazarded.  Their  maxim  seems  to  have 
been,  Better  be  absolute  de.spots  in  a  narrower  territory,  than 
have,  in  an  extensive  empire,  an  authority  not  only  more  limit* 
ed,  but  co-ordinate,  with  that  of  other  potentates. 

It  was  a  practice  in  the  churches,  at  that  time,  and  had  been 
for  some  ages  before,  to  enrol  the  names  of  those,  who  died 
in  the  communion  of  the  church,  in  certain  records,  whicli 
they  called  diptychs,  wherein  the  bishops  were  registered  by 

D  d 


21&  LECTURES  ON 

themselves.  And  of  these,  publick  commemoration  was  mad«a, 
by  the  officiating  deacon,  at  a  certain  part  of  the  service.  After 
the  death  of  Acacius,  repeated  attempts,  both  in  Felix's  life- 
time, and  after  his  death,  in  the  time  of  his  successours,  were 
made  on  the  part  of  the  Greeks,  to  restore  the  amity  that  had 
formerly  subsisted  between  Greeks  and  Latins.  And,  in  effect, 
the  whole  ground  of  the  quarrel,  the  henaticon,  or  decree  of 
union,  a  compromise  by  observing  silence  on  some  disputed 
points,  the  objections  against  the  synod  of  Chalcedon,  and 
against  the  doctrine  contained  in  a  letter  of  pope  Leo,  on  the 
controverted  articles,  were  given  up.  The  only  thing,  that 
served  to  obstruct  the  proposed  union,  was,  that  the  names  of 
Acacius,  and  the  bishops  who  succeeded  hirn,  during  the  con- 
tinuance of  the  schism,  were  in  the  oriental  churches  still  re- 
tained and  read  in  the  diptychs. 

This,  though  it  did  not  in  the  least  affect  the  doctrine  in  de- 
bate, affected  what  more  nearly  touched  Rome,  the  supremacy 
she  aspired  at  over  all  otlier  churches.  Whilst  the  names  of 
those  prelates  continued  there,  they  were  acknowledged  as 
lav/ful  bishops,  notwithstanding  that  they  had  all  been  either 
deposed  by  the  Roman  pontiff,  or  at  least  refused  his 
communion.  And  though  nothing  could  be  a  more  bare- 
faced usurpation  than  the  power  then,  for  the  first  time,  arro- 
gated by  the  pope,  it  was,  after  repeated  trials,  found  impossi.' 
ble  to  obtain  reconciliation  on  any  other  terms.  This  obsti- 
nacy, or,  if  you  will,  firmness,  in  the  pontiff,  will  appear  the 
more  remarkable,  when  the  other  circumstances  of  the  case 
are  attended  to.  The  Constantinopolitans  were  so  attached 
to  the  memory  of  Acacius,  that  for  many  years  no  successour 
could  permit  his  name  to  be  erased,  without  endangering  not 
only  his  own  life,  but  the  tranquillity  both  of  the  city,  and  of  a 
great  part  of  the  empire.  The  emperours,  themselves,  long 
considered  it  as  too  hazardous  a  thing  even  for  them  to  au- 
thorize. Besides,  the  east  was  at  this  time  divided  into  two 
great  factions,  the  eutychians  and  the  orthodox.  It  gave  the 
former  no  sm.all  subject  of  triumph,  and  no  little  advantage, 
over  the  latter,  their  antagonists,  that  these,  whilst  the  va- 
riance subsisted,  could  reap  no  benefit  or  assistance  from  the 
western  churches,  though  of  the  same  sentiments,  in  the  pro- 
found disputes  of  the  time,  with  themselves.  It  was  in  vain 
for  the  Greeks  to  urge  the  impossibility  of  a  compliance,  with- 
out raising  a  combustion  in  the  then  capital  of  the  empire.  It 
was  in  vain  to  urge,  that  the  continuance  of  the  breach  would 
endanger  the  total  subversion  of  orthodoxy  in  the  east,  that  is, 
throughout  the  better  half  of  Christendom.  The  pope  remain- 
ed inflexible. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  211 

The  truth  is,  these  arguments  served  rather  to  confirm  him 
in  the  resolution  he  had  taken,  than  to  induce  him  to  relinquish 
it.  The  more  difficult  the  accomplishment  of  the  condition 
was,  on  the  part  of  tlie  orientals,  the  more  complete  would 
be  the  victory  of  Rome.  In  like  manner,  the  greater  the  cla- 
mour and  the  disturbances  it  migtit  raise  in  the  imperial  city, 
and  other  Grecian  churches,  the  more  signal  would  be  both 
the  triumph  af  the  Latins,  and  the  mortification  of  the  Greeks; 
and  the  less,  in  time  to  come,  would  the  latter  be  disposed  to 
hazard  a  breach  with  the  former.  And  as  to  the  arguments 
from  the  imminent  dangers  to  which  the  orthodox  faith,  in 
the  east,  would  be  exposed  by  the  conlinuaBce  of  this  unnatural 
division,  nothing  can  be  plainer,  tlian  that  this  very  circum- 
stance hardened  the  obstinacy  of  the  pontiff  into  downright  in- 
flexibility. He  saw  but  too  well  the  necessity  the  Greeks  were 
under  of  obtaining  peace  on  any  terms,  that  they  might  be  able 
to  withstand  and  surmount  so  formidable  a  faction  as  that  of 
the  Eutychians,  sprung  up  in  the  heart  of  their  own  country, 
and  daily  gathering  strength  from  the  divisions  of  the  or- 
thodox. 

But,  may  on«  say,  is  it  possible  that  the  Romans  should, 
from  such  selfish  and  political  considerations,  have  made  so 
small  account  of  endangering,  throughout  the  half  of  the  chris- 
tian world,  what  they  reckoned  the  purity  of  the  faith,  and 
absolutely  necessary  to  salvation?  That  in  reality  they  acted 
this  part,  is  an  historical  fact  incontrovertible.  So  far 
from  abating  of  their  terms,  as  the  danger  of  the  faith  increase 
ed,  they,  on  the  contrary,  raised  their  demands,  in  the  p'^rsua- 
sion  that  the  Greeks,  from  the  urgency  of  the  necessity,  would 
be  disposed  to  yield  them  every  thing.  In  fact,  by  this  artful 
management,  more  was  obtained  at  last  than  had  at  first  been 
insisted  on. 

To  one  who  reads  the  history  of  the  church  with  attention 
and  understanding,  nothing  can  be  more  manifest,  than  that, 
with  the  Romans,  power  was  uniformly  the  primary  object, 
doctrine  was  always  but  the  secondary.  Their  great  political 
talents  and  address  were  constantly  exerted  in  modelling  and 
employing  the  latter  in  such  a  manner  as  to  render  it  instru* 
mental  in  promoting  the  former.  This  cannot,  with  equal 
truth,  be  affirmed  of  the  Greeks.  The  many  philosophick  sects 
which  had  arisen  among  them,  when  in  a  state  of  paganism, 
had  produced  the  pestilent  itch  of  disputation,  togetlier  with 
that  species  of  subtlety,  which  enables  those  possessed  of  th's 
miserable  cacoethes,  to  find,  on  every  subject,  materials  fov 
gratifying  it.  Such  were  the  disposition  and  habits  which,  o;) 
their  conversion  to  Christianity,  they  brought  with  them  into 


21^  LECTURES  ON 

the  new  religion  ;  every  doctrine  of  which  was,  by  this  frivo- 
lous, though  ingenious,  inquisitive,  loquacious,  and  disputa- 
tious people,  most  unnaturally  perverted  into  matter  of  meta- 
physical discussion.  Hence  sprang  those  numerous  sects  into, 
which  the  christian  community  was  sq  early  divided^ 

It  deserves  our  notice,  that  for  several  ages  all  the  contro- 
versies, almost  without  exception,  originated  among  the 
Greeks.  I  use  the  term  Greeks  in  the  same  latitude  wherein 
it  is  generally  used,  in  ecclesiastick  history,  for  the  oriental 
churches  which  spoke  the  Greek  language,  as  contradistin- 
guished to  the  occidental,  which  spoke  the  Latin.  Almost  the 
only  exception  to  the  remark  I  have  made  is  the  pelagian 
heresy,  which  doubtless  arose  in  the  west.  The  origin  of  thp 
African  sect  of  the  Donatists  was  more  properly  a  difference,^ 
in  regard  to  discipline,  than  in  the  explanation  of  any  article 
of  faith.  It  may  also  deserve  our  notice,  that  though  th<t. 
Jewish  state,  from  the  time  of  Moses,  had  subsisted,  for  man^ 
centuries,  in  very  different  situations,  and  under  different 
forms  of  government,  yea,  and  in  difJPerent  countries,  there 
were  no  traces  of  different  sects,  or  of  any  theological  disputes 
among  them,  till  after  the  Macedonian  conquests,  when  they 
became  acquainted  with  the  Grecians. 

But  some  remarks  on  the  origin,  the  nature,  and  the  con™ 
sequences  of  the  controversies,  that  arose  in  the  church,  an4 
on  the  methods  that  were  taken  to  terminate  them  by  dioce- 
san synods,and  ecumenical  councils,  which  constitute  a  most  es- 
sential part  of  ecclesiastical  history,  and  therefore  require  to  be 
treated  more  particularly,  shall  be  reserved  for  a  separate 
discourse. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  21^ 


LECTURE  XIV. 


T^HE  subject  of  the  present  ecture  is  remarks  on  the  origin, 
the  nature,  and  the  consequemes  of  the  controversies,  that,  in 
the  early  ages, arose  in  the  churh,and  on  the  methods  that  were 
taken  to  terminate  them  by  docesan  synods,  and  ecumenical 
councils.  Though  this  may,  it  first  sight,  appear  a  digression 
from  the  examination  of  the  loman  policy,  exercised  in  rais- 
ing the  wonderful  fabrick  of  spritual  tyranny,  yet,  on  a  nearer 
view,  it  will  be  found  to  be  inimately  connected  with  that  po- 
licy, insomuch,  that  the  progess  of  the  latter  is,  without  a 
competent  knowledge  of  the  ftrmer,  scarcely  intelligible. 

I  observed,  in  my  last  prele.tion,  that  for  several  centuries 
almost   all   our  theological    dsputes   originated    among  the 
Greeks  :  that  to  this  sort  of  exrcitation  their  national  charac- 
ter, their  education,  and  early  labits,  conspired  to  inure  them. 
They  spoke  a  language  which  vas  both  copious  and  ductile  to 
an  amazing  degree.     Let  me  dd,  that  the  people  in  general, 
especially  since  they  had  been  brought  under  a  foreign  yoke, 
were  become  extremely  adulattry  in  their  manner  of  address, 
abounding  in  titks  and  complmental  appellations.     To  this 
their  native  speech  may  be  saic,  in  some  respect,  to  have  con- 
tributed, by  the  facility  wherevuth  it  supplied  them  with  com- 
pound epithets,  suited  to  almat  every  possible  occasion,  and 
expressive  of  almost  every  possible  combination  of  circum- 
stances.    This   peculiarity,   in  the  genius  of   their    tongue, 
gratified  also  their  taste  both  br  variety  and  for  novelty  ;  for 
they  were   thereby  enabled  to  form  new  compositions  from 
words  in  use,  almost  without  end  j   and  when  they  formed 
them  analogically,  were  not  lia)le  to  the  charge  of  barbarism. 
Hence   sprang  up  the  manj  flattering  titles  they  gave  to 
their  saints  and  clergy,  lefofMtplta,  ti^oi^v^oi-,  rpto-otfi.®^,  T^iir/^Kct^t@''i 

B^oTrpeTTes-etloii  ^etfAMXcift^olotlo^i  x?'^>?''^oi>  Xfi^o<Pop<^,  %pf?-oKiv^<^',   and 

a  thousand  others.     The  same  mode  of  adulation  they  in- 


214   ^  LECTURES  ON 

troduced  into  their  publick  worship;  for  though  no  terms 
can  exceed,  or  even  equal,  the  majesty  and  perfections 
of  the  Supreme  Being,  the  practic«  of  loading  their  addres- 
ses with  such  epithets,  betrayed  but  loo  evidently  their  tenden- 
cy to  think  God  such  a  one  as  themselves,  to  be  gained  by  fair 
speeches  and  pompous  titles  :  for  it  is  a  common  and  just  ob- 
servation, that  they  are  the  greatest  flatterers  who  love  most 
to  be  flattered.  An  exuberance  o/  inadequate  and  vain  words 
does  but  injure  the  simplicity  and  the  dignity  of  worship.  In 
thtir  explanations  of  the  mysterieij  as  they  were  called,  and  in 
their  encomiums  on  the  saints,  tley  abounded  in  such  terms, 
and  were  ever  exercising  their  in/ention  in  coining  new  ones. 

The  genius  of  the  Latin  tongue,  on  the  contrary,  did  not 
admit  this  freedom  ;  nor  had  th<  people,  who  spoke  it,  to  do 
them  justice,  so  much  levity  aid  vanity  as  to  give  them  the 
like  propension.  What  they  afttrwards  contracted  of  this  dis» 
position,  they  derived  solely  from  their  intercourse  with  the 
Greeks,  and  the  translation  of  thiir  writings.  Indeed,  in  their 
versions  from  the  Greek,  as  the  translator  was  often  obliged, 
in  order  to  express  in  Latin  sucl  compound  epithets,  to  recur 
either  to  circumlocution,  or  to  fome  composition,  which  the 
analogy  of  the  language  could  iiardly  bear,  those  things  ap-. 
peared  awkward  and  stiff  in  a  Litin  dress,  which  in  a  Grecian, 
habit  moved  easily  and  agreeable 

Now  several  of  the  early  dispites,  it  may  be  remarked,  took 
their  rise  from  the  affectation  of  employing  these  high-sounds 
ing  titles.  Hence,  in  a  great  miasure,  the  noise  that  wasrais, 
ed  about  the  terms  «ft«iiro-<(^,  ojit«yo-/(^,  vTroo-lxcri^^  v7roi-x] iK(^y  S-eo- 
loMi;,  ;;k;ff5-o7fls«:e5,  when  first  introduced  into  their  theology.  To 
these  terms  the  Latins  had  nosingle  words  properly  corres- 
ponding. Augustin,  one  of  tie  most  eminent  of  the  Latin 
fathers,  seems  to  have  been  so^ensible  of  this  defect  in  dis- 
coursing on  the  trinity,  (L.  v,  i  9)  that  he  apologizes  for  his 
language,  and  considers  the  expressions  he  employs,  as  only 
preferable  to  a  total  silence  on  t|ie  subject,  but  not  as  equally 
adapted  with  the  Greek.  "  Dijtum  est,"  says  he,  "  tres  per- 
"  songe,  non  ut  illud  diceretur,  led  ne  taceretur."  The  truth 
is,  so  little  do  the  Greek  terms,^nd  the  Latin,  on  this  subject, 
correspond,  that  if  you  regard  the  ordinary  significations  of 
the  words,  (and  I  know  not  Whence  else  we  should  get  a 
meaning  to  them)  the  doctrine  ^f  the  east  was  one,  and  that  of 
the  west  was  another,  on  this  irticle.  In  the  east  it  was  cne 
essence,  cmd  three  substances,  f^tc}fi(rici,  rpeis  iiTrerxFeii ;  in  the  west 
it  was  one  substance  and  three  ^rsons,  "  una  substantia,  tres 
persons."  The  phrases  r^io,  Tr^oc^Ta,  in  Greek,  tres  substanttcey 
in  Latin,  would  both,  I  imagiiie,   have  been  exposed  to  the 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  21S 

charge  of  tritheism.  But  which  of  the  two,  the  Greek  or  the 
Latin  phraseology,  was  most  suited  to  the  truth  of  the  case,  is  a 
question  1  will  not  take  upon  me  to  determine.  I  shall  only  say 
of  Augustin's  apology,  that  it  is  a  very  odd  one,  and  seems  to 
imply,  that  on  subjects  above  our  comprehension,  and  to  which 
all  human  elocution  is  inadequate,  it  is  better  to  speak  nonsense 
than  be  silent.  It  were  to  be  wished,  that  on  topicks  so  sub- 
lime, men  had  thought  proper  to  confine  themselves  to  the 
simple  but  majestick  diction  of  the  sacred  scriptures. 

It  was  then  the  extravagant  humour  of  these  fanciful  and 
prating  orientals,  assisted  by  their  native  idiom,  which  pro- 
duced many  of  the  new  fangled  and  questionable  terms  I  have 
■  been  speaking  of  j  the  terms  produced  the  controversies  j  and 
these,  in  return,  gave  such  consequence  to  the  terms  that  gave 
them  birth,  and  created  so  violent  an  attachment  in  the  party 
that  favoured  them,  that  people  could  not  persuade  themselves 
that  it  was  possible,  that  the  doctrine  of  the  gospel  should  sub- 
sist, and  be  understood  or  conveyed. by  any  body  without  them. 
Men  never  seemed  to  reflect,  that  the  gospel  had  been  both 
better  taught  and  better  understood,  as  well  as  better  practised, 
long  before  this  fantastick  dress,  borrowed  from  the  schools 
of  the  sophists,  was  devised  and  adapted  to  it.  However, 
the  consequence  which  these  disputes  gave  to  the  Greek  terms, 
occasioned  an  imitation  of  them  in  the  less  pliant  language  of 
the  occidentals.  Hence  these  barbarisms,  or  at  least  unclas- 
sick  words,  in  Latin,  esaentialis^  siibstantialis^  consubstantialiSy 
Christipara^  Deipara^  and  several  others  of  the  same  stamp,  to 
be  found  in  the  writings  of  the  ecclesiastick  authors  of  the 
fifth  and  following  centuries.  All  those  subtle  questions, 
which  so  long  distracted  and  disgraced  the  church,  would  then, 
we  may  well  believe,  both  from  the  character  of  the  people, 
and  from  the  genius  of  the  tongue,  much  more  readily  origi- 
nate, as  history  informs  us  that  they  did,  among  the  Greeks 
than  among  the  Latins.  Indeed  the  latter  were  often  slower 
than  we  should  have  expected  in  coming  into  the  dispute.  For 
this  we  may  justly  assign,  as  one  principal  reason,  the  general 
ignorance  of  the  Latins  at  that  time.  Letters  had,  long  before 
Constantine,  been  in  their  decline  at  Rome  ;  insomuch,  that  at 
the  period  I  allude  to,  when  those  controversies  were  most 
hotly  agitated,  the  greater  part,  even  of  men  in  respectable 
stations,  understood  no  tongue  but  their  owxs..  If  they  had 
studied  any  other,  doubtless  it  would  have  been  Greek  which 
was  become  the  language  of  the  imperial  court  now  at  Con- 
stantinople ;  and  not  only  of  Greece  itself,  but  of  almost  all  the 
east,  particular!}^  of  all  the  men  of  rank  and  letters  in  Asia, 
Syria^i  and  Egypt.     And  if  even  Greek  was  iktle  understood  \n 


816  LECTUE£S  ON 

Rome,  we  may  safely  conclude,  that  other  languages  trei^ 
haraly  known  at  all. 

Yet  that  it  was  very  little  known  in  the  fifth  century^  ill  thfe 
time  of  pope  Celestine,  whea  the  controversy  betwixt  Cyril 
and  Nestorius  broke  out,  is  evident  from  this  single  circum- 
stance :  When  Nestorius  v/rote  to  the  pope,  sending  him  an 
account  of  the  contest,  together  with  a  copy  of  his  homilies, 
containing  his  doctrine  or  the  point  in  question,  all  in  Greek, 
his  mother  tongue  ;  not  only  was  the  pontiff  himself  ignorant 
of  that  language,  but,  it  would  seem,  all  the  Roman  clergy, 
consisting  of  many  hundreds,  knew  no  more  of  it  than  he* 
And,  though  we  cannot  suppose,  that  there  were  not  theft 
many  in  Rome  who  understood  Greek,  yet  there  seem  to  have 
been  none  of  that  consider^ition,  that  the  pope  could  decently 
employ  them  in  a  business  of  so  great  consequence.  Accor- 
dingly, he  was  obliged  to  send  the  whole  writings  to  Cassian,  a 
fnan  of  learning,  a  native  of  Thrace,  who  then  resided  at 
Marseilles  in  Gaul,  to  be  translated  by  him  into  Latin.  This 
delay  gave  Cyril  no  small  advantage  ;  for  though  he  wrote  to 
the  pope  after  Nestorius,  yet  knowing  better,  it  would  seem, 
the  low  state  of  literature  at  that  time  in  Rome,  he  prudently 
employed  the  Latin  tongue,  in  giving  his  representation  of  thd 
affair ;  and,  in  this  way,  produced  a  prepossession  in  the 
mind  of  the  pontiff,  which  it  was  impossible  for  Nestorius 
afterwards  to  remove. 

Perhaps,  too,  it  may  have  contributed  to  make  the  Latins 
less  disposed,  at  first,  to  enter  with  warmth  into  the  controver- 
sies which  sprang  up,  that  the  terms  whereby  the  Greek  words, 
on  both  sides  of  the  question,  were  latinized,  rather  than  trans- 
lated, appeared  so  uncouth  and  barbarous,  that  they  had  little 
inclination  to  adopt  them.  But  when  time  had  familiarized 
their  ears  to  them,  we  find  they  could  enter  into  the  subject 
as  passionately  as  the  Greeks. 

When  controversies  once  were  started,  the  natural  vanity  of 
the  disputants,  together  with  the  conceived  importance  of  the 
subject,  as  relating  to  religion,  (an  importance  which  every  one, 
in  proportion  to  the  resentment  contracted  from  the  contra- 
diction he  had  met  with,  was  disposed  to  magnify)  inflamed 
their  zeal,  and  raised  a  violence  in  the  parties  which  the  world 
had  never  witnessed  before.  In  whatever  comer  of  Christen- 
dom the  controversy  originated,  the  flame  came  by  degrees  to 
spread  throughout  the  whole,  so  that  the  Latin  as  well  as  the 
Greek  churches  never  failed,  sooner  or  later,  to  be  involved  in 
the  dispute.  As  the  former,  hov\rever,  for  the  reasons  above- 
mentioned,  came  almost  always  last  into  the  contest,  they  had 
previous  opportunity  of  knowing  both  on  what  side  those  who, 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  2if 

fbr  learning,  parts,  and  piety,  had  attained  the  highest  reputa- 
tion, declared  themselves,  and  to  what  side  the  people  gene- 
rally swayed.  With  these  advantagies,  the  Latins,  though  less 
intelligent  in  philological  and  nietaphysical  disputes,  yet  being 
more  united  among  themselves,  a  consequence,  in  a  great 
measure,  of  their  ignorance,  which  made  them  more  implicit 
followers,  (these  I  say)  when  they  did  declare  in  favour  of  a 
side,  commonly,  by  their  number,  decided  the  question,  there- 
by ascertaining  what  was  orthodox,  and  what  was  not. 

It  may  also  account  in  part  for  their  greater  unanimity,  that 
they  had  fewer  leaders.  There  were  several  eminent  sees  in 
the  east,  which  were  a  sort  of  rivals  to  one  another,  for  not  to 
mention  the  ej^archal  sees  of  Ephesus  and  Cesarea,  there  were 
the  patriai-chates  of  Alexandria^  Antiochj  and  Constantinople, 
each  considerable  enough  to  be  a  check  upon  the  rest.  In  the 
west,  there  was  no  see  whatever  that  could  cope  with  Rome* 
But  it  must  be  owned,  that  there  was  not  only  a  closer  union, 
but  in  general  more  steadiness^  among  the  Latins,  than  among 
their  rivals,  the  Greeks.  This  may  be  accounted  for  partly 
from  the  same  causes,  partly  from  the  difference  of  national 
character*  The  Romans  were  as  remarkable  for  their  gravi- 
ty, as  the  Greeks  for  thieir  levity.  Indeed,  the  Raman  pontiffs, 
who  were  the  chief  leaders  in  the  west,  did  not  often  renounce 
a  cause,  in  favour  of  which  they  had  once  declared  themselvesi 
I  say  they  did  not  often  5  for  that  they  acted  this  part  some- 
times, is  unquestionable.  However  far,  therefore,  this  argu- 
ment may  go,  in  support  of  the  policy  of  Rome,  it  cannot  be 
urged  iti  support  of  her  infallibility,  as  it  admits  several  gla- 
ring exceptions.  Nothing  is  more  notorious  than  Rome's 
desertion  of  the  side  which  she  had  long  maintained,  on  the 
ridiculous  question  about  the  three  chapters  :  in  regard  to 
which,  pope  Vigilius,  as  is  observed  by  Maimburg  *,  shifted 
isides  no  fewer  than  four  times.  It  is  well  known,  that  pope 
Honorius  was,  after  his  death,  by  a  council  holden  at  Constan* 
tinople,  towards  the  end  of  the  seventh  centuiy,  comnlonly 
called  the  sixth  general  council,  condemned  as  a  heretick,  and 
ian  organ  of  ti>e  devil,  for  holding  the  doctrine  of  the  Mono- 
thelites;  To  this  judgment  the  then  reigning  pope  Agatho 
consented,  not  only  by  his  legates,  but  by  the  reception  and 
approbation  he  gave  to  the  decrees  of  that  assembly.  Also 
Leo  the  second,  Agatho's  successour,  declared  his  cbneur- 
rence  in  the  anathema  pronounced  by  the  council  against  pdp^ 
Honorius, 

*  Traite  Historiqne  del'Eglise  de  Rome,  chap,  Viii 


218  LECTURES  ON 

Were  it  necessary  to  produce  an  instance  of  change  in  the 
same  pontiff,  beside  Vigilius  above-mentioned,    Liberius  fur- 
nishes a  most  apposite  example.     This  pope,  about  the  middle 
of  the  fourth  century,  when  the  Arian  controversy  was  at  its 
height,  intimidated  by  the  power  of  the  reigning  emperour 
Constantius,  whom  he  knew  to  be  a  zealous  disciple  of  Arius, 
declared   pubiickly  in  favour  of  that  party,  and  excommuni- 
cated Athanasius,  whom  all  the  orthodox  regarded  as  the  pa- 
tron and  defender  of  the   catholick  cause.     This  sentence  he 
soon  after  revoked,  and  after  revoking  it,  his  legates,  at  the 
council  of  Aries,  overawed  by  the  emperour,  concurred  with 
the  rest  in  signing  the  condemnation  of  Athanasius,  yielding, 
as  they  expressed  it,  to  the  troublesome  times.     Afterwards, 
indeed,  Liberius  was  so  far  a  confessor  in  the  cause  of  ortho- 
doxy, that  he  underwent  a  long  and  severe  banishment,  rather 
than  lend  his  aid  and  countenance  to  the  measures  which  the 
emperour  pursued  for  establishing  Arianism  throughout  the 
empire.     But  however  firm  and  undaunted  the  pope  appeared 
for  a  time,  he  had  not  the  magnanimity  to  persevere,  but  was 
at  length,  in  order  to  recover  his  freedom,  his  country,  and  his 
bishoprick,  induced  to  retract  his  retractation,  to  sign  a  second 
time   the   condemnation  of  Athanasius,  and  to  embrace  the 
Arian  symbol  of  Sirmium.     Not  satisfied  with  this,  he  even 
wrote  to  the  Arian  bishops  of  the   east,  excusing  his  former 
defence  of  Athanasius,  imputing  it  to  an  excessive  regard  for 
the  sentiments   of  his  predecessor  Julius  ;  and  declaring,  that 
now,  since  it  had  pleased  God  to  open  his  eyes,  and  show  him 
how  justly  the  lieretick  Athanasius  had  been  condemned,  he 
separated  himself,  from  his  communion,  and  cordially  joined 
their  holinesses,  (so  he  styled  the  Arian  bishops)  in  supporting 
the  true  faith.     Before  he  returned  from  exile,  meeting  with 
the   emperour,  who   was  by  this  time  turned  semiarian,  the 
pliant  pontiff,  impatient  to  be  again  in  possession  of  his  see, 
was  induced  to  change  anew,  and  subscribe  the  semiarian  con- 
fession. 

This  apostacy  of  Liberius,  which  has  given  .infinite  plague 
to  the  prostitute  pens  employed  in  support  of  papal  usurpa- 
tions, whose  venal  talents  are  ever  ready  for  the  dirty  work  of 
defending  every  absurdity,  that  can  gratify  the  views  of  their 
superiours,  this,  which  in  their  hands  has  proved  a  copious 
'  Source  of  sophistry,  chicane,  and  nonsense,  whilst,  as  Bower 
'^well  expresses  it,  like  men  struggling  for  life  in  deep  water, 
and  catching  at  every  twig,  they  flounce  in  vain  from  quibble  to 
quibble,  and  from  one  subterfuge  to  another ;  this  apostacy,  I 
say,  was  acknowledged  and  lamented  by  all  the  contemporary 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  219 

fathers,  who  take  occasion  to  mention  these  transactions,  even 
by  those  who  have  since  been  canonized,  and  are,  at  this  day» 
worshipped  in  the  Romish  church,  as  saints  of  the  first  mag- 
nitude. A  plain  proof,  that  the  plea  of  infallibility  had  not 
then  been  heard  of.  Jerom,  Athanasius,  Hilarius,  all  in  one 
voice,  accuse  this  po}>eof  giving  the  sanction  of  his  name  to 
heresy.  The  last  of  these,  St.  Hiiarius,  cannot  refrain,  whem 
he  mentions  him,  from  anathematizing  him,  and  all  his  peifi- 
dious  adherents.  All  the  ancient  historians  concur,  in  like 
manner,  in  attesting,  that  he  apostatized  from  the  faith. 

Moreover,  the  same  Liberius  afterwards  admitted  to  his 
communion,  being,  pi'obably,  ignorant  of  their  sentiments,  the 
Macedonians,  who  denied  the  divinity  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Last  of  all,  after  the  death  of  the  Arian  emperour,  and  the 
accession  of  Julian,  commonly  called  the  apostate,  who,  though 
not  a  christian,  professed  to  be  a  friend  to  toleration,  the  vene- 
rable, the  infallible  head  of  the  church  universal,  as  the  parti- 
sans of  Rome  now  denominate  their  pontiff,  made  one  change 
more,  and  returned  to  orthodoxy. 

To  give  but  one  instance  more,  pope  John  the  twenty-second, 
in  two  sermons,  (for  even  so  low  as  the  fourteenth  century, 
popes  sometimes  preached)  maintained,  that  the  saints  depart- 
ed are  not  admitted  to  the  beatifick  vision  till  after  the  resur- 
rection. This  doctrine  gave  great  and  general  offence.  One 
Wallis,  an  Englishman,  was  the  first  who  ventured  to  preach 
publickly  against  it.  This  he  did  in  Avignon  itself,  where  the 
pope  then  resided.  Wallis,  for  his  uncommon  audacity,  was 
thrown  into  prison,  and  condemned  to  live  on  bread  and  water. 
Afterwards  the  question  was  canvassed  by  several  theologians 
of  character,  particularly  by  those  of  the  university  of  Paris, 
with  all  the  bishops  and  abbots  then  in  that  metropolis,  and 
also  by  a  synod  assembled  at  Vincennes,  who  unanimously 
condemned  the  pope's  opinion  as  repugnant  to  scripture,  and 
heretical.  Philip,  the  sixth  king  of  France,  sent  the  pontiff 
an  authentick  copy  of  this  decision,  signed  by  twenty-six  emi- 
nent divines,  requiring  his  holiness  to  acquiesce  in  their  judg- 
ment, and  (if  cardinal  d'Ailly  ma)^  be  credited)  threatening, 
that  in  case  he  did  not,  he  would  cause  him  to  be  burned  for 
heresy.  The  pope  at  first  attempted  to  vindicate  his  doctrine, 
but  finding,  soon  after,  that  the  dissatisfaction,  and  even  scan- 
dal, which  it  had  given,  were  almost  universal,  he  was  ind'.iced 
to  declare,  in  a  publick  consistory,  that  he  never  intended  to 
support  any  tenet  contrary  to  the  scriptures  and  the  catholick 
faith  J  but  that  if  he  had  inadvertently  dropt  any  such  thing  ia 
his  sermons,  he  retracted  it.  This,  though  not  an  acknowledg- 
ment of  his  errour,  was  a  plain  acknowledgment  of  his  falli- 


220  LECTURES  ON 

bilitjr.  In  his  last  illness,  however,  a  few  hours  before  hk, 
death,  he  made  a  publick  and  solemn  retractation  of  his  erro-^ 
neons  doctrine,  in  pi-esence  of  all  the  cardinals  and  bishops 
then  at  Avignon,  called  together  on  purpose,  declaring,  that 
the  saints  departed  were  admitted  to  the  sight  of  God's  es- 
sence, (such  was  the  jargon  of  the  time)  as  soon  as  they  were 
purged  from  their  sins  ;  and  retracting  whatever  he  had  said, 
preached,  or  written,  to  the  contrary.  His  successour,  Bene- 
dict the  twelfth,  that  his  own  orthodoxy  might  not  be  suspect- 
ed, took  an  early  opportunity  of  preaching  on  the  heatifick 
vision,  and,  in  his  sermon,  showed  his  sentiments  to  be  the 
reverse  of  those  which  had  given  so  much  scandal  in  his  prede- 
cessor. Not  satisfied  with  this,  he  caused  the  point  to  be 
discussed  in  a  consistory,  to  which  he  invited  all  who  had 
adopted  pope  John's  opinion,  that  they  might  produce  what 
they  had  to  offer  in  its  defence.  Afterwards  he  published  a, 
constitution,  wherein,  without  naming  his  predecessor,  he  ex- 
pressly condemned  his  doctrine,  commanding  all  to  be  prose- 
cuted as  hereticks,  who  should  thenceforth  obstinately  maintaia; 
or  teach  it.  I  might  produce  another  instance  from  the  same 
pope  John,  who  maintained,  in  a  decretal,  that  the  Franciscan 
friars  had  property,  in  direct  contradiction  to  a  decretal  of  his 
predecessor  Nicolas  the  fourth,  affirming,  with  other  popes, 
that  they  had  none,  and  was  not  less  zealous  for  the  side  he  took 
in  this  profound  controversy  than  if  the  whole  of  Christianity 
had  depended  on  it ;  commanding  the  inquisiters  to  extirpate^ 
by  all  possible  means^  the  contrary,  pestilential,  erroneou&j^ 
heretical,  and  blasphemous  doctrine. 

But  to  return  to  our  subject,  it  is  certain  that  the  Bishops 
of  Rome  cannot  be  accused  of  having  often  acted  so  weak  a 
part  as  pope  Liberius,  pope  Vigiliiis,  or  pope  John.  Besides, 
the  case  of  the  first,  and  that  of  the  church,  in  his  time,  were 
particular.  Heterodoxy  had  then  a  powerful  and  bigotted 
prince  for  its  protector,  who  stuck  at  no  means  by  which  he 
could  accomplish  the  extirpation  of  the  faith  of  Nice,  and  the 
establishment  of  Arianism  in  every  part  of  his  dominions  ; 
and,  in  fact,  what  with  persuasion,  what  with  compulsion,  the 
defection  was  become  universal,  insomuch,  that  before  the 
death  of  that  violent  antitrinitarian  persecutor,  there  was,  in 
the  whole  church,  but  one  orthodo5^  bishop  who  kept  possesr^ 
sion  of  his  see,  Gregory  of  Elvira,  in  Andalusia.  However 
justh^,  therefore,  the  versatility  of  Liberius  may  be  considered 
as  totally  subversive  of  the  plea  of  infallibility,  it  does  not  in- 
validate what  has  been  said  in  regard  to  the  profound  policy 
and  address  generally  maintained  by  that  watchful  power^ 
The  case  of  Vigilius  was,  in  some  respects,  siwiilar. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  22t 

We  have  seen  with  what  steadiness,  and  at  how  great  a  risk, 
the  re-union  of  the  eastern  church  and  the  western  was  so  ef- 
fected as  to  give  a  very  considerable  ascendancy  to  the  latter, 
which  she  had  never  enjoyed  before.  The  manner  of  conduct- 
ing the  measure  did  but  too  manifestly  show,  that  it  was  a 
matter  of  no  consequence  to  her,  whether  the  Greeks  were  or- 
thodox or  heterodox,  whilst  they  continued  independent  of  her 
authority,  and  did  not  dread  her  displeasure.  These,  at  least 
the  greater  part  of  their  doctors,  were  a  race  of  quibbling  so- 
phists, engrossed  with  the  imaginary  importance  of  their  un-t 
intelligible  speculations,  and  futile  disquisitions  who  did  not 
conceive  a  nobler  object  of  their  pursuit,  than  that  their  par- 
ticular explanations  and  phraseology  should  be  adopted  into 
the  system  and  language  of  the  church. 

Though  the  Greeks  taken  together  were,  in  all  literary  mat* 
ters,  an  overmatch  for  the  Latins,  yet,  as  the  latter  kept  pretty 
close  united,  whilst  the  former  were  split  into  parties,  eternally 
disputing  and  squabbling,  the  Latins  derived  hence  an  incon- 
ceivable advantage.  For  however  much  the  Greeks  in  general 
affected  to  despise  them  as  rude  and  illiterate,  compared  with 
themselves,  no  sooner  did  they  take  a  side  in  any  controversy, 
than  they  were  sure  to  gain  over  that  party  of  the  Greeks 
whose  side  they  took  ;  the  general  rivalship  between  Greeks 
and  Latins  was  swallowed  up  in  the  love  of  victory,  so  natural 
to  professed  combatants,  and  in  the  particular  emulation  that 
each  entertained  against  a  hated  antagonist  in  the  controvejsy. 
Though  both  nations  were  greatly  degenerated  from  what  they 
had  been  in  the  Augustan  age,  the  vestiges  of  their  original  and 
respective  national  characters,  as  described  by  the  prince  of 
J^atin  poets,  were  still  discernible  j 

Excndent  alii  spirantia  mollius  sera : 
Credo  equidem:  vivos  ducent  de  marmore  vultus,  i. 
Orabunt  causas  melius  :  ccelique  meatus 
Describent  radio,  et  surgentia  sidera  dicent. 
Tu  regere  imperio  populos,  Romane,  memento, 
(Hse  tibi  erunt  artes)  pacisque  imponere  morem  ; 
Parcere  subjectisji  et  deb^Uare  superbos. 

.  iEN.  L.  6. 

That  the  Romans,  by  their  valour,  their  publick  virtue,  and 
their  immense  superiority  in  the  art  of  war,  should  have  rais- 
ed an  empire  over  the  undisciplined  surrounding  nations,  who 
were  all,  except  the  Greeks,  so  much  their  inferiours  in  every 
thing  but  animal  courage  and  brute  force,  is  not  so  very  as- 
tonishing, as  to  a  careless  eye  it  may  at  first  appear.  But  that 
after  their  extraordinary  success  had  enriched  them  with  the 
spoils  of  all  nations  ;  after  their  riches  had  introduced  luxury, 


S2;2  LECTURES  ON 

effeminacy,  and  Indolence;  after  they  had,  by  their  vices^^ 
become,  in  their  turn,  a  prey  to  the  barbarians  they  had  for- 
merly subdued  ;  after  the  empire  came  to  be  torn  to  pieces 
by  Goths,  Vandals,  Huns,  and  Lombards  ;  when  the  sun  of 
science  was  now  set,  and  the  night  of  ignorance,  superstition, 
and  barbarism,  was  fast  advancing ;  that  out  of  the  ruins  of 
every  thing  great  and  venerable,  there  should  spring  a  new 
species  of  despotism  never  heard  of,  or  imagined  before, 
avhose  ineans  of  conquest  and  defence  were  neither  swords 
nor  spears,  fortifications  nor  warlike  engines,  but  definitions 
and  canons,  sophisms  and  imprecations,  and  that  by  such 
weapons,  as  by  a  kind  of  magick,  there  should  actually  be 
reared  a  second  universal  monarchy,  the  most  formidable  the? 
world  ever  knew,  will,  to  latest  ages,  afford  matter  of  asto- 
nishment to  every  judicious  inquirer. 

Of  the  numerous  controversies  wherewith  the  church  was, 
for  several  ages,  pestered,  some  related  only  to  things  cere- 
monial. Of  this  sort  was  the  contention  abaut  the  time  of  the 
observance  of  Easter,  which,  so  early  as  the  second  century, 
raised  a  flame  in  the  church.  Others,  doubtless,  concerned 
essential  articles  in  the  christian  theology.  Such  were  the 
Arian  controversy  and  the  Pelagian.  Whether  Jesus  Christ, 
was  a  divine  person,  and  existed  from  eternitj^,  or  a  mere 
creature,  and  had  a  beginning  ;  whether  by  grace  in  scripture 
we  are  to  understand  advantages  with  regard  to  us  properly 
external,  such  as  the  remission  of  sins,  the  revelation  of  God's, 
will  by  his  Son,  the  benefit  of  the  examples  of  Christ,  and  his 
apostles,  the  promises  of  the  gospel,  and  the  gifts  of  Provi- 
dence, or  whether  we  ought  also  to  comprehend,  under  that 
name,  as  things  equally  real,  certain  internal  benefits  conferred 
on  the  mind  by  the  invisible  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  are 
momentous  questions,  which  nearly  affect  the  substance  of 
christian  doctrine. 

But  from  this  fund  many  other  questions  may,  by  men 
more  curious  than  wise,  be  easily  started,  which  no  modest 
man  will  think  himself  capable  of  answering,  and  no  pious 
man  will  think  it  his  duty  to  pry  into.  Such  are  some  of  those 
that  have  been  moved  in  regard  to  the  manner  of  the  spirit's 
operation,  in  regard  to  the  generation  of  the  second  person  of 
the  trinity,  and  the  procession  of  the  third.  To  this  class 
may  be  added,  those  impertinent  inquiries  which  have  some- 
times produced  as  great  a  ferment  as  the  most  momentous 
would  have  done.  Of  this  sort  is  the  question  concerning  the 
natural  corruptibility  of  the  body  of  Christ,  and  that  about 
the  palpability  of  the  bodies  of  the  saints  after  the  resurrec- 
tion. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  ^2.1 

There  is  afourth  set  of  questions,  which  are  fnere  logoma- 
chies, in  regard  to  which  the  different  combatants  have  either 
no  fixed  meaning  to  the  words  they  employ,  or  mean  precisely 
the  sartie  thing  under  different  expressions.  In  this  last  case, 
the  controversy  is  either  absolutely  nonsensical,  or  purely 
verbal.  Nor  has  this  been  the  least  fruitful  source  of  conteri- 
tion  in  the  church.  What  could  be  a  more  flagrant  example 
of  this  than  the  question  which  created,  in  the  time  of  pope 
Hormisdas  and  some  of  his  successours,  so  much  animosity 
and  strife  ?  The  point  was,  whether  we  ought  to  say,  "  One 
*'  of  the  trinity  suffered  in  the  flesh,"  or,  "  One  person  of 
*'  the  trinity  suffered  in  the  flesh."  On  this  pretty  puzzle 
tTiere  were  four  different  opinions.  One  set  approved  both 
•e^xpressions,  a  second  condemned  both,  a  third  maintained 
the  former  expression  to  be  orthodox,  the  latter  heterodox, 
and  a  fourth  affirmed  the  reverse.  In  this  squabble,  emperours, 
popes,  and  patriarchs,  engaged  with  great  fury.  The  then 
reigning  emperour  Justinian  was  as  mere  a  dotard  on  all  the 
sophistical  trash  then  in  vogue  among  the  theologians,  as  any 
scholastick  recluse,  who  had  been  inured  to  wrangling  from  his 
cradle,  and  had  nothing  else  to  mind.  Luckily,  however,  no 
council  was  convened  to  discuss  the  point,  and  give  it  suffi- 
cient importance.  In  consequence  of  this  cruel  neglect  it 
died  away. 

The  dispute  with  Nestorius,  though  equally  frivolous,' being 
treated  differently,  took  deeper  root.  The  point  in  debate  at 
first  was.  Whether  the  Virgin  Mary  might  be  denominated 
more  properly  the  mother  of  God,  or  the  mother  of  him  that 
'%  .God  ?  It  is  plain,  that  there  could  not  arise  a  question 
which  might  be  more  justly  said  to  turn  merely  on  grammati- 
cal propriety.  Both  sides  admitted,  that  Jesus  Christ  is  God 
as  well  as  man  ;  both  sides  admitted,  that  his  human  nature 
was  born  of  the  Virgin,  and  that  his  divine  nature  existed 
from  eternity  ;  both  sides  admitted  the  distinction  between 
the  two  natures,  and  their  union  in  the  person  of  Christ. 
Where  then  lay  the  difference?  It  could  be  no  where  but  in 
phraseology.  Yet  this  notable  question  raised  a  conflagration 
in  the  church,  and  proved,  in  the  east,  the  source  of  infinite 
mischief,  hatred,  violence,  and  persecution.  It  is  reported  of 
Constantine  Copronymus,  in  the  eighth  century,  that  he  one 
day  asked  the  patriarch,  "  What  harm  would  there  be  in 
"  calling  the  Virgin  Mary  the  mother  of  Christ  ?"  God  pre- 
serve your  majesty^  answered  the  patriarch,  with  great  emo- 
tion, from  entertaining  such  a  thought.  Do  you  not  see  hoxv 
Nestorius  is  anathematized  for  this  by  the  xvhole  church^  "  t 
"  only  asked  for  my  own  information,"  replied  the  emperour. 


S24  LECTURES  OH 

*'  but  let  it  go  no  farther."     A  few  emphatical  strokes  likfe 
this  are  enough  to  make  the  people  of  that  age  appear  to  those 
of  the  present  as  not  many  removes  from  idiocy.     Had  NeS" 
torius,  whose  correctness  of  taste  (for  opinion  is  out  of  the 
question)  made  him  isensible  of  the  irreverence  of  an  expres- 
sion, which  seemed  greatly  to  derogate  from  the  divine  ma- 
jesty, and  tended  manifestly  to  corrupt  the  religious  senti- 
ments of  the  vulgar,  vrho  are  incapable  of  entering  into  meta- 
physical distinctions  ;  been  but  a  better  politician,  (for  to  do 
him  justice,   JRome  herself  cannot  accuse  him  of  the  most 
unclerical  sin  of  moderation)  and,  consequently,  had  he  been 
a  more  equal  match  for  his  adversary  St.  Cyril,  the  decision 
of  the  church  had  infallibly  been  the  reverse  of  what  it  was* 
and  we  should  at  this  day  find   Cyrilianism  in  the  list  of 
heresies,  and  a  St.  Nestorius  in  the  kalendar  of  the  beatified. 
On  such  accidental  circumstances  it  often  depended,  whether 
a  man  should  be  deemed  an  heresiarch  or  a  saint,  a  devil  or 
an  angel.     "  I  shall  only  remark,"  says  a  modern  Roman 
Catholick  author,  (Richard  Simon,  not  Father  Simon  of  the 
Oratory,   Des  ceremonies  et  coutumes  des  chretiens  orien- 
taux,  Ch,  7,)   "that  some  might  infer,  that  nestorianism  is 
*'  but  a  nominal  heresy,  and  that  if  Nestorius  and  St.  Cyril 
*'  had  understood  one  another,  they  might  have  reconciled 
*'  their  opinions,  and  prevented  a  great  scandal  in  the  church. 
"  But  the  Greeks  were  aUvays  keen  disputants,  and  it  was  by 
"  them  that  most  of  the  first  heresies  were  broached.     Com- 
"  monly  their  disputes   consisted  in  a  sort  of  metaphysical 
*'  chicanery  on  ambiguous  phrases*     Hence  they  drew  infer- 
"  ences  after  their  manner,  and  from  inferences,  proceeded  to 
"  personal  abuse,  until  the  parties  at  last  became  irreconcile- 
"  able  enemies.   Had  they  but  coolly  explained  their  thoughts^ 
*'  they  would  have  found  that,   in  most  cases^  there  was  no 
"  scope  for  the  imputation  of  heresy  on  either  side*     This  is 
*'  what  some  allege  to  have  happened  in  the  affair  of  Nestorius 
"  and  St.  Cyril."      True,  indeed,  Mr.  Simon,  and  for  a  speci- 
men of  their  spirit  and   coolness,  let  us  but  hear  the  final 
judgment  of  the  council  of  Ephesus  in  this  famous  cause. 
"  Our  Lord  Jesus   Christ,  against  whom  the  most  wicked 
*'  Nestorius  has  levelled  his  blasphemies,  declares  him,  by  the 
"  mouth  of  this  council,  deprived  of  the  episcopal  dignity,  and 
"  cut  off  from  the  communion  of  the  episcopal  order."     The 
note  bearing  this  sentence  was  thus  directed:  "  To  Nestorius^ 
a  second  Judas."     In  every  thing  they  were  guided  by  Cyril, 
whom,  in  respect  of  meekness,  they  might,  wit;h  equal  truth,, 
have  denominated  a  second  Moses« 


£CCLESiASTICAL  HISTORt.  33^ 

Nobody  is  9.t  a  I083  to  perceive  the  opinion  of  the  French 
author  above  quoted  in  regard  to  this  affair.  Yet  we  may  ob- 
serve in  passing,  in  what  an  indirect  manner  he  is  obliged  to 
express  it.  Some  tnig/it  infer  ahd  some  allege.  And  no  wonder 
that  he  should  take  this  method  of  suggesting  a  principle  to- 
tally subversive  of  the  doctrine  of  the  infallibility,  wheresoever 
placed  i  a  doctrine  which  now,  among  the  learned  of  that  com- 
munion, seems  to  be  regarded  as  purely  of  the  exoterick  kind, 
that  is,  as  proper,  whether  true  or  false,  to  be  inculcated  on 
the  people,  as  an  useful  e'spedient  in  governino;  them*  This 
Frenchman's  principle  plainly  subverts  the  pope  s  pretensions  ; 
for  Celestine  freely  acceded  to  the  sentence,  condemning  Ne- 
Storius  as  a  most  pestilent  heretick.  It  subverts  the  preten- 
sions of  an  ecumenical  council,  which  that  of  Ephesus^  how- 
ever disorderly  and  tumultuous,  has  always  been  acknowledg- 
ed by  the  Romanists  to  be.  It  subverts  the  pretensions  of  the 
church  collectively,  which  did,  for  many  ages,  universally  (the 
not  very  numerous  sect  of  Nestorius  only  excepted)  receive 
the  decrees  of  that  synod.  This  Ephesian  council  was  one  of 
the  four,  concerning  which  pope  Gregory^  who  is  also  called 
St.  Gregory,  and  Gregory  the  Great,  declared,  that  he  receiv- 
ed them  with  as  much  veneration  as  he  did  the  four  gospels* 

Yet  so  little  of  consistency  in  speculations  of  this  sort  is  to 
be  expected  from  either  popes  or  councils,  that  when  so  late 
as  the  pontificate  of  Clement  the  eleventh,  in  the  beginning  of 
the  present  century,  some  affected  to  style  St.  Ann  the  grand- 
jnother  of  God,  (no  doubt,  with  the  pious  view  of  conferring 
an  infinite  obligation  on  her)  his  holiness  thought  fit  to  sup- 
press the  title,  as  being,  in  his  judgment,  offensive  to  pious 
«ars.  Yet  it  is  impossible  for  one,  without  naming  Nestorius j 
,t0  give  a  clearer  decision  in  his  favour*  For  what  is  the  mean- 
ing o£  grandmother  P  Is  it  any  more  than  saying,  in  one  word, 
what  mother^s  mother^  ox  father'' s  mother^  expresses  in  two  ?  To 
.$ay  then  of  Ann,  that  she  was  the  ynother  of  the  mother  of  Godj, 
which  they  admit,  and  to  say  that  she  was  God^s  grandmother, 
which  they  reject,  are  absolutely  the  same.  The  sole  spring 
of  offence  is  in  the  first  step  i  if  that  be  admitted,  the  propriety 
,Oif  such  expressions,  as  God's  grandmother  or  grandfather, 
tincle,  aunt,  or  cousin,  follows  of  course.  The  second  council 
of  Nice,  with  greater  consistency,  in  quoting  the  epistle  of 
James,  do  not  hesitate  to  style  the  writer  God^s  brother^  Kefloe. 
Tov  d^eXipoB-eov  icmu^oi,  are  their  very  words.  Only  from  this  more 
recent  circumstance,  we  may  warrantably  conclude,  that  if  the 
phrase,  mother  of  God^  had  never  been  heard  till  the  time  of 
Clement  the  eleventh,  it  had  fared  well  with  the  author,  if  he 
had  not  been  pronounced  both  a  blasphemer  and  a  her.etie?^^ 

iF  f 


226  LECTURES  ON 

What  made  the  case  of  Nestorius  the  harder  was,  that  he  was, 
in  no  respect,  the  innovator.  He  was  only  shocked  at  the  in- 
novations in  language,  if  not  in  sentiments,  of  the  new-fangled 
phrases  introduced  by  others,  such  as  this,  of  the  mother  of 
God^  and  the  eternal  God  was  borii ;  the  impassible  suffered ;  the 
immortal  and  only  true  God  expired  in  agonies.  I  have  seen  a 
small  piece,  called,  if  I  remember  right,  "  Godly  riddles,"  by 
the  late  Mr,  Ralph  Erskine,  one  of  the  apostles  and  founders 
of  the  Scotch  secession,  written  precisely  in  the  same  taste. 
**  There  is  nothing  new,"  says  Solomon,  "under  the  sun." 
In  the  most  distant  ages  and  remote  countries,  kindred  geni- 
uses may  be  discovered,  wherein  the  same  follies  and  absurd- 
ities, as  well  as  vices,  spring  up  and  flourish.  To  men  of  shal- 
low understandings,  such  theologick  paradoxes  afford  a  plea- 
sure not  unlike  that  which  is  derived  from  being  present  at 
the  wonderful  feats  of  jugglers.  In  these,  by  mere  sleight  of 
hand,  one  appears  to  do  what  is  impossible  to  be  done  ;  and  in 
those,  by  mere  sleight  of  tongue,  (in  which  the  judgment  has 
no  part)  an  appearance  of  meaning  and  consistency  is  given  to 
terms  the  most  self  contradictory,  and  the  incredible  seems  to 
be  rendered  worthy  of  belief.  I'o  set  fools  a  staring,  is  alike 
the  aim  of  both.  I  shall  only  observe,  that  of  the  two  kinds 
of  artifice,  the  juggler's  and  the  sophister's  the  former  is  much 
the  more  harmless. 

To  proceed ;  the  contention  that  arose  soon  after,  on  occa- 
sion of  the  doctrine  of  Eutyches,  appears  to  have  been  of  the 
same  stamp.  The  whole  difference  terminated  in  this,  that 
the  one  side  maintained,  that  Christ  is  o/"two  natures,  the 
other,  that  he  is  of  and  in  two  natures,  both  agreeing,  that  in 
one  person  he  is  perfect  God  and  perfect  man.  Yet  this  dis- 
pute was,  if  possible,  conducted  with  more  fury  and  rancour 
than  the  former.  Much  need,  in  those  days,  had  the  rulers  of 
the  church,  who  called  themselves  the  followers  and  ministers 
of  the  meek  and  humble  Jesus,  to  go  and  learn  what  this 
meaneth,  (2  Tim.  ii,  14,)  Charge  them  before  the  Lord^  that  they 
strive  not  about  -words  to  no  profit^  but  to  the  subverting  of  the 
hearers.  They  acted,  on  the  contrary,  as  if  they  could  not 
conceive  another  purpose  for  which  a  revelation  had  been  given 
them,  but  to  afford  matter  of  endless  wrangling,  and  to  foster 
all  the  most  malignant  passions  of  human  nature.  Had  they 
so  soon  forgotten  the  many  warnings  they  had  received  from 
inspiration,  of  the  mischievous  tendency  of  such  a  conduct, 
that  profane  and  vain  babblings  would  increase  to  more  un- 
godliness, that  their  pitiful  logomachies,  their  oppositions  of 
science,  falsely  so  called,  their  foolish  and  unedifying  ques- 
tions and  vain  j anglings,  could  only  gender  strife  \  Is  it  possible 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  227 

they  could  be  so  blind  as  not  to  see  their  own  character,  as 
well  as  the  consequences  of  their  conduct,  so  distinctly  deli- 
neated in  these  words  of  the  apostle  :  If  any  man  consent  ?iQt 
to  wholesome  uoords^  practical  and  useful  instructions,  not  idle 
speculations,  even  the  -words  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christy  and  the 
doctrine  that  is  according  to  godliness;  he  is  proud^  knowing  no- 
things  but  doting  about  questions  and  strifes  of  words ^  xvhereof 
Cometh  envy^  strife^  railings^  evil  surmisings^  perverse  disputings 
of  men  of  corrupt  minds^  and  destitute  of  the  truth^  who  think 
that  gain  is  godliness  ?  Could  they  read  these  things  and  not  be 
struck  with  so  bright  a  reflection  as  they  exhibited  of  their  own 
image  ?  We  must  think,  that  at  that  period,  these  things  were 
but  little  read,  and  less  minded. 

From  the  fifth  century  downwards,  it  became  the  mode,  in 
all  their  controversies,  to  refer  to  the  councils  and  fathers,  in 
support  of  their  dogmas,  and  to  take  as  little  notice  of  sacrecj 
writ,  as  if  it  no  way  concerned  the  faith  and  practice  of  a  chris- 
tian. But  their  despicable  and  unmeaning  quibbles  (to  say 
the  truth)  were  not  more  remote  from  the  doctrine  of  the  gos- 
pel, than  the  methods  whereby  they  supported  their  dogmas 
were  repugnant  to  the  morals  which  it  inculcates.  Let  us  hear 
the  character  given  of  their  councils,  their  procedure,  and  the 
effects  produced  by  them,  by  a  contemporary  author,  a  bishop 
too,  who  spoke  from  knowledge  and  experience.  St.  Gregory 
Nazianzen,  writing  to  Procopius,  thus  excuses  his  refusal  to 
attend  a  synod,  at  which  his  presence  was  expected :  "  To  tell 
*'  you  plainly,  I  am  determined  to  fly  all  conventions  of  bi- 
*'  shops  ;  for  I  never  yet  saw  a  council  that  ended  happily.  In- 
*'  stead  of  lessening,  they  invariably  augment  the  mischief. 
*^  The  passion  for  victory,  and  the  lust  of  power,  (you'll  per- 
*'  haps  think  my  freedom  intolerable)  are  not  to  be  described 
"  in  words.  One  present  as  a  judge,  will  much  more  readily 
*'  catch  the  infection  from  others  than  be  able  to  restrain  it  in 
*'  them.  For  this  reason  I  must  conclude,  that  the  only  st;- 
**  curity  of  one's  peace  and  virtue  is  in  retirement."  Thus  far 
Nazianzen.  How  a  man,  who,  in  the  fifth  century,  could  talk 
so  reasonably,  and  so  much  like  a  christian,  came  to  be  saint- 
ed, is  not,  indeed,  so  easily  to  be  accounted  for. 

On  the  whole,  when  one  seriously  considers  the  rage  of 
dogmatizing,  which,  for  some  ages,  like  a  pestilential  cpnta- 
gion,  overspread  the  church  ;  when  one  impartially  examines 
the  greater  part  of  the  subjects,  about  which  they  contended 
with  so  much  vehemence,  and  their  manner  of  conducting  the 
contest,  especially  in  those  holy  convocations,  called  synods, 
it  is  impossible  not  to  entertain  a  low  opinion  of  their  judg- 
ment and  abhorrence  of  ther  disposition.     At  the  same  time. 


m  LECTURES  ON 

it  is  but  doing  them  justice  to  remark,  that  in  cases  wherein 
Iheir  imaginations  were  not  heated  by  controversy  and  party« 
Spirit,  when  they  kept  within  their  proper  sphere,  the  making; 
of  regulations  or  canons  for  maintaining  order  and  disciplinfe 
in  the  church,  they  did  not  often  betray  a  want  of  judgment 
iand  political  capacity-  On  the  contrary,  they  frequently  give 
ground  of  admiration  to  the  considerate,  that  the  same  persons 
should,  in  the  one  character,  appear  no  better  than  sophisters 
^d  quibblers,  fanaticks  and  furies,  and,  in  the  other  no  lessi 
tlian  prudent  statesmen  and  wise  legislators. 

But  it  is  time  to  return  from  this  digression,  if  it  can  be 
called  a  digression,  about  councils,  to  the  policy  of  Rome, 
and  the  means  by  which  she  rose  to  the  very  pinnacle  of 
worldly  prosperity  and  grandeur,  I  thought  it  of  consequence 
to  give  in  passing  a  slight  sketch  of  the  general  nature,  and 
rise,  and  consequences  of  those  disputes,  which  constitute  s6 
essential  a  part  of  ecclesiastical  history,  I  shall,  in  my  next, 
proceed  in  tracing  the  causes  and  maxims  which  contrihutedi 
to  the  establishi^ent  of  the  Rorxian  hier^chy. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY,  2^9 


tECTURE  XV. 


1 


N  my  last  discourse,  1  gave  you  a  general  account  of  the 
nature,  rise,  and  progress,  of  those  controversies,  which  con- 
tinued for  many  ages  to  disturb  the  peace  of  the  church,  and 
which  were,  in  a  great  measure,  the  consequence  of  a  defection 
from  the  genuine  spirit  of  the  gospel,  from  the  primitive  sim- 
plicity of  its  doctrine,  and  purity  of  its  morals,  and  no  less 
evidently  the  cause  of  still  greater  corruptions,  and  a  more 
flagrant  apostacy,  though  men  still  retained  the  abused  name 
of  christian.  I  took  notice  also  of  the  methods  taken  to  ter- 
minate those  disputes  by  synods  and  councils,  a  remedy  which 
commonly  proves  worse  than  the  disease  ;  rather,  I  should 
Say,  a  prescription  of  that  kind,  which  instead  of  curing, 
inflames  the  distemper,  and  renders  it  epidemical ;  nay,  is 
often  productive  of  several  others.  The  very  convoking  of 
such  numerous  assemblies,  from  all  the  corners  of  the  em- 
pire, for  the  discussion  of  such  senseless  debates,  as  the  greater 
part  of  them  manifestly  were,  gave,  in  the  eye  of  the  world, 
a  consequence  to  their  logomachies,  and  drew  an  attention  to 
them,  which  it  was  impossible  they  should  ever  otherwise 
have  acquired.  Besides,  the  sophistry  and  altercation  em- 
ployed by  both  parties  in  the  controversy  naturally  gave  birth 
to  new  questions,  insomuch,  that  they  sprang  up  faster  on 
every  side,  than  it  was  in  their  power  to  terminate  them. 
What  the  poets  feigned  of  the  hydra  was  here  verified.  By 
lopping  off  one  of  the  heads  of  the  monster,  they  gave  rise  at 
least  to  two  others.  "  Keges  ignari  (says  Le  Clerc,  Ars  Grit, 
p.  2,  s.  2,  c.  5,)  "■  nee,  inter  bonos  principes  numerandi,  con- 
♦'  vocarunt  Graeculos,  qui  linguae  acuendse  per  totam  vitam 
**  operam  dederant,  rerum  ipsarum  ignaros,  contendendi  stu- 
"  diosos,  perpetuis  rixis  inter  se  divisos  ;  et  bardos  aliquot 
*'  homines  ex  occidente,  rudiores  quidem  illis,  sed  non  meli^- 


230  LECTURES  ON 

"  ores  ;  iique  post  pudendas  contentiones,  obscurissima  quse— 
"  dam  dogmata,  verbis   ssepe   parum    aptis,   auctoritate    sua 
"  firmant ;  quae  stupidi  populi  sine  examine   adorent,   quasi 
"  divinitus  accepta.  Non  ficta  me  loqui  norunt  qui  synodoram 
'*^  historias  iegerunt ;  nee  certe  vanus  erat  qui  dixit ; 

Ovai  Ti  ■zsm  c-vvoooia-iv  ofMB-povoi;  eo'Tof*,'  eyaye 

Xijvaiv  j;  yspxvav  c6y,pi]ce.  f^x^vaf^i^mv 
Ev3-'  epi^.  ivB-et.  i^aS-o?  ri  x.ci(  onT^ia  icpvyrlcc  -^etpdlB-ev 
E<5  ha  a'vrf^svea^v  ^a^ov  ctyetpoi^svcc. 

"  Nunquam  ego  sedebo  in  synodis  anserum  aut  gruum  temere 
*'  pugnantium.  Illic  contentio,  illic  rixa,  et  probra  antea 
"  latentia  saevorum  hominum  in  unum  locum  collecta."  I  shall 
make  a  supposition,  which  may  at  first  appear  extravagant, 
but  which  will,  I  hope,  on  examination,  be  found  entirely 
apposite  to  the  case  in  hand.  Suppose  that  a  single  province 
in  the  empire  had  been  visited  with  the  pestilence,  and  that 
the  distemper  raged  with  so  much  violence,  that  few  in  that 
neighbourhood  escaped  ;  suppose  further,  that  the  ruling 
powers  had,  in  their  great  wisdom,  determined  to  summon, 
from  all  the  provinces  infected  and  uninfected,  the  whole 
medical  tribe,  phvsicians,  surgeons,  and  apothecai'ies,  sound 
and  diseased  indiscriminately,  in  order  to  consult  together, 
and  fix  upon  the  most  effectual  method  of  extirpating  the 
latent  poison  ;  would  it  have  been  difficult  to  foresee  the  con- 
sequences of  a  measure  so  extraordinary  ?  The  diseased  in 
that  assembly  would  quickly  communicate  the  infection  to  the 
sound,  till  the  whole  convention,  without  exception,  were  in 
the  same  wretched  plight ;  and  when  all  should  be  dispersed 
and  sent  home  again,  they  would  return  to  their  respective 
countries,  breathing  disease  and  deach  wherever  they  went ; 
so  that  the  malignant  contagion  which  had,  at  first,  afllicted 
only  a  small  part,  would,  by  such  means,  be  rendered  univer- 
sal, and  those  who  ought  to  have  assisted  in  the  cure  of  the 
people,  would  have  proved  the  principal  instruments  of  poi- 
soning them.  Exactly  such  a  remedy  were  the  decisions  of 
councils,  to  the  plague  of  wrangling,  at  that  time  not  less 
terrible,  if  its  consequences  were  duly  weighed. 

What  an  ecumenical  council  is,  has  never  yet  been  properly 
ascertained.  If  we  are  to  understand  by  it  an  assembly, 
wherein  every  individual  church  is  represented,  there  never 
yet  was  such  a  council,  and  v/e  may  safely  predict  never  will 
be.  There  was  so  much  of  independency  in  the  primitive 
churches,  before  the  time  of  Constantine,  that  at  first  their 
provincial  and  diocesan  synods  (for  they  had  not  then  any  ge?- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  231 

neral  councils)  claimed  no  authority  over  their  absent  mem- 
bers, or  even  over  those  present,  who  had  not  consented  to 
the  acts  of  the  majority*  Thus  they  were,  at  tirst,  more  pro- 
perly, meetings  for  mutual  consultation  and  advice,  in  what 
concerned  the  spiritual  conduct  of  their  flocks,  than  societies 
vested  with  legislative  powers,  even  over  the  members  of  their 
own  community.  In  proportion  as  the  metropolitans  rose 
above  the  suffragans,  and  the  patriarchs  above  the  metropoli- 
tans, the  provincial  synod,  in  concurrence  with  the  metropo- 
litan, and  the  diocesan  synod,  in  concurrence  with  the  patri- 
arch, acquired  more  authority  and  weight. 

But  when,  after  the  establishment  of  Christianity,  ecumeni- 
cal councils,  or  what,  in  a  looser  way  of  sptaking,  were  cal- 
led so,  were  convoked  by  the  emperour,  (which  continued  for 
ages  to  be  the  practice  in  the  church)  if  the  patriarchs,  or  ex- 
archs themselves,  were  divided,  as  each  was  commonly  fol- 
lowed by  the  bishops  of  his  diocese,  there  was  no  one  persoa 
of  weight  enough  to  unite  them.  Sometimes,  indeed,  th6 
emperour,  when  bigotted  to  a  side,  interfered  in  their  debates  ; 
and  when  he  did,  he  rarely  failed,  by  some  means  or  other, 
to  procure  a  determination  of  the  dispute  in  favour  of  his 
opinion.  But  this,  though  commonly  vindicated  by  those 
who  were,  or  who  chose  to  be  of  the  emperour's  opinion,  was 
always  considered  by  the  losing  side  as  violent  and  uncanoni- 
cal,  notwithstandmg  that  his  right  to  convene  them  was  allow- 
ed on  all  hands.  However,  as  it  never  happened,  even  ia 
their  most  numerous  councils,  that  every  province,  nay,  that 
every  civil  diocese,  or  exarchate,  I  might  say,  that  every 
christian  nation  had  a  representation  in  the  assembly,  so  there 
was  not  one  of  those  conventions  which  could,  with  strict  pro- 
priety, be  called  ecumenical.  With  those  who  were  not  sa- 
tisfied with  their  decisions,  there  were  never  wanting  argu- 
ments, not  only  specious,  but  solid,  against  their  universality, 
and,  consequently,  against  their  title  to  an  universal  submis- 
sion. 

Certain;  it  is,  that  no  party  was  ever  convinced  of  its  errours 
by  the  decision  of  a  council.  If  the  church  came  to  an  ac- 
quiescence, the  acquiescence  will  be  found  to  have  been  impu- 
table more  to  the  introduction  of  the  secular  arm,  that  is,  of 
the  emperour's  authority,  who  sometimes  from  principle,  some- 
times from  policy,  interposed  in  church  affairs,  than  to  any 
deference  shown  to  the  synodical  decree.  Accordingly,  wheu 
the  imperial  power  was  exerted  in  opposition  to  the  council'^ 
determination,  as  was  frequently  the  case,  it  was,  to  the  fuli^ 
as  effectual  in  making  the  council  be  universally  rejected,  as, 
on  other  occasions,  in  making  it  be  universally  received.     I 


^32  LECTURlfcS  O"^ 

•may  say  further,  that  this  power  was  equally  effectual  in  coil* 
yoking  councils  to  establish  the  reverse  of  what  had  been 
established  by  former  councils*  In  what  passed  in  relation 
both  to  the  Arian  and  to  the  Eutychian  controversies,  and  af- 
terwards in  those  regarding  the  worship  of  images^  these 
points  are,  to  every  intelligent  reader,  as  clear  as  day. 

Indeed,  the  doctrine  of  the  infallibility  of  councils  is,  com- 
paratively, but  a  novel  conceit.  Those  of  the  ancients,  who 
paid  the  greatest  deference  to  their  judgment,  did  not  run  in- 
to diis  extravagance.  What  was  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen's 
opinion  of  the  matter,  may  be  learnt  from  the  quotation  I  gave 
you  from  that  author  in  the  preceding  prelection.  But  the 
futility  of  recurring  to  this  method  for  terminating  disputes  is 
what  the  whole  christian  world,  Greek  and  Latin,  Protestant 
and  Papist,  seems  now  to  be  sufficiently  convinced  of,  inso- 
much, that  without  the  spirit  of  prophecy,  one  may  venture 
to  foretel,  that,  unless  there  is  a  second  dotage  which  the 
church  has  yet  to  undergo,  the  council  of  Trent  will  remaia 
the  last  under  the  name  of  ecumenical,  assembled  for  the  pur* 
pose  of  ascertaining  articles  of  faith. 

But  to  return  to  the  steps  and  maxims  by  which  the  papal 
power  arose.  I  have  already  mentioned  two  things  very  re- 
markable in  the  Roman  policy  ;  one  is,  the  steadiness  witK 
which  they  pursued  a  measure  once  adopted,  the  other,  thfik 
sacrifice  they  always  made  of  every  other  consideration  to  the 
advancement  of  their  authority  and  grandeur.  In  the  contro- 
versies that  sprang  up,  I  have  observed  the  advantages  the 
Latin  church  derived  from  the  following  circumstances,  to  wit, 
that  they  were  commonly  later  than  the  Greeks,  in  becoming 
acquainted  with  the  subject  in  debate,  had  much  less  of  a  con- 
troversial genius,  and  were  more  united  among  themselves. 

In  many  of  the  disputes,  especially  the  earlier  disputes,  we 
cannot  say  of  one  of  the  two  opposite  tenets  more  than  of  the 
other,  that  it  tended  to  advance  the  hierarchy.  Several  of 
them,  as  we  have  seen,  were  either  mere  verbal  cavils,  or 
such  jumbles  of  ill-adapted  ideas,  into  the  form  of  proposi- 
tions, as  were  quite  incomprehensible,  and  no  otherwise  con- 
nected with  practice  than  in  the  general,  but  very  strong  ten- 
dency they  had,  to  divert  men's  attention  and  zeal  from  what 
was  essential  and  useful,  to  what  was  entirely  imaginary  and 
frivolous.  Nevertheless  in  these,  however  unimportant  in 
themselves,  it  was  of  great  importance  to  Rome,  for  the  ad- 
vancement of  her  authority,  that  her  explicit  declaration  on 
either  side  should  prove  decisive  of  the  question.  In  the  lat-; 
ter  controversies,  indeed,  such  as  those  concerning  purgatoryij; 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  233 

image  worship,  transubstantiation,  indulgences,  the  indelible 
character,  the  efficacy  of  the  opus  operatum^  that  is,  the  exte- 
rior of  the  sacramental  action,  and  some  others,  we  may- 
say  with  truth,  that  ecclesiastical  authority  was  clearly  interest- 
ed on  one  side  of  the  question.  It  would  even  imply  an  un- 
common degree  of  stupidity  not  to  discern  hov/  much  in  those 
questions  the  victorious  side,  or  that  which  obtained  the  sanc- 
tion of  Catholicism,  tended  to  exalt  the  priesthood.  But  be- 
fore these  controversies  came  upon  the  carpet,  the  power  of 
Rome  was  so  far  advanced,  that  she  had  not  the  same  occasion 
as  formerly  for  reserve  and  caiition  in  making  her  election* 
Accordingly  her  election  was  invariably  on  the  side  which 
most  advanced  her  power.  It  is  for  this  reason  that  the  very 
origin  of  such  doctrines,  as  well  as  the  methods  she  ernploved 
in  supporting  them,  are  not  improperly  imputed  to  priestcraft.. 

In  regard  to  the  maxim  above-mentioned,  lAvhich  is,  indeed, 
of  the  essence  of  priestcraft,  namely)  to  make  every  conside- 
ration give  way  to  the  aggrandizement  of  her  priestly  authori- 
ty, we  have  already  produced  one  strong  evidence  of  it,  in 
the  manner  wherein  the  peace  was  affected,  after  what  is  called 
the  great  schism  of  Acacius,  or  the  first  schism  of  the  east. 
But  in  nothing  does  this  Roman  maxim  appear  more  glaring, 
than  in  the  encouragement  invariably  given  to  those  who,,  from 
any  part  of  the  world,  could  be  induced  to  appeal  to  the  Roman 
pontiff.  For  many  centuries,  always  indeed  rill  the  right  of 
receiving  such  appeals  came  by  custom  to  be  firmly  established, 
it  was  the  invariable  maxim  of  the  Roman  court,  without  pay- 
ing the  smallest  regard  to  the  merits  of  the  cause,  often  without 
examining  it,  to  decide  in  favour  of  the  appellant.  No  maxim 
could  be  more  unjust.  At  the  same  time  for  a  power  which 
had,  by  her  opulence  and  arts,  and  some  peculiar  advantages, 
become  so  formidable,  no  maxim,  ere  the  practice  of  appealing 
to  her  judgment  had  taken  root,  could  be  more  politick,  or  more 
effectually  tend  to  encourage  and  establish  that  practice. 

That  you  may  be  satisfied  I  do  not  wrong  the  Romish  hier- 
arch,  do  but  examine  a  little  how  the  case  stood  in  some  of  the 
first  causes  that  were  in  this  manner  brought  before  his  tribu- 
nal. Indeed,  in  the  very  first  of  any  note,  his  holiness  was 
rather  unfortunate  in  following  the  maxim  I  have  mentioned. 
The  appeal  I  allude  to  was  that  of  the  heresiarch  Pelagius,  and 
his  disciple  Celestius,  from  the  sentence  of  an  African  synad, 
by  which  their  doctrine,  had  been  condemned,  and  they  them- 
selves, and  all  the  teachers  and  holders  of  their  teiaetg,  had 
been  excommunicated.  From  this  sentence  they  appealed  to; 
Rome,  Zozimus,  then  pope,  agreeably  to.  the  maxims  of  his 
<X)urt,  immediately,  but  very  unfortunately  for  himself,  de- 

Gg 


f^Si  LECTURES  ON 

dared  in  their  favour,  vindicated  their  doctrine,  and,  in  a  letter 
directed  to   the   African  bishops,  upbraided  these  prelates  in 
the  strongest  terms  for  the  temerity  of  their  procediire,  order;- 
ed  the  accusers  of  Pelagius  and  Celestius,  v/ithiu  two  months, 
tQ  repair  to  Rome,  to  make  good  their  charge  before  him, 
declaring,  that  if  they  did  not,  he  would  reverse  the  sentencp 
which  had  been  pronounced.     And  as  to  Heros  and  Lazarus, 
who  had  taken  a  principal  part  in  the  prosecution  ;  pien  who, 
if  we  may  credit  the  testimony  of  St.  Prosper  and  St.  Jeroin, 
(for  Rome  is  in  this  confronted  by  her  own  saints)  were  em^ 
nenl  for  the  purity  of  their  lives,  as  well  as  for  their  faith  and 
zeal ;  the  pope,  in  ^.  summary  manner,   without  so  much  as 
giving  them  a  hearing,  or  assigning  them  a  day  for  offering 
what  they  had  to  plead  in  their  own  defence,  deposed  and  ex-, 
communicated  them.     The  steadiness  of  the  Africans,  how^^ 
ver,  co-operating  with  other  causes,  at  last  compelled  the  pon- 
tiff not  only  to  relax,  but  totally  to  change  his  style  and  eon- 
duct.     Though  neither  the  bishops,  nor  Paulinus  the  accuser^ 
whom  the  pope  had  summoned  by  name,  paid  the  least  regard 
to  his  summons,  or  to  his  declared  intention  of  haying  the 
cause  tried  anew  at  Rome,  they  gave  it  a  rehearing  in  another^, 
and  a  very  numerous  African  synod,  convened  at  Carthage, 
wherein,  without  showing  any  deference  to  the  sentiments  of 
the  Roman  bishop,  they  unanimously  adhered  to  their  former 
judgment.  .  ^  -,^j 

The  ardour  of  the  pontiff  to  favour  an  appellant  did  mani^. 
festly,  in  this  instance,  carry  him  beyond  the  bounds  of  pru- 
dence. The  condemnation  of  the  Pelagian  doctrine  had 
been,  in  some  respect,  ratified  by  his  predecessor  Innocent. 
Two  African  synods,  and  one  Numidian  synod,  assembled  at 
Milevis,  had  with  one  voice  condemned  it.  Celestius,  after 
his  condemnation  in  Africa,  having  taken  refuge  in  Ephesus, 
was  soon  driven  thence  in  consequence  of  the  general  odium 
which  his  opinions  raised,  and  had  afterwards  no  better  trea|?? 
ment  in  Constantinople,  when  he  thought  proper  to  betake 
himself  thither.  Besides,  the  emperour  HonoriuSj  without 
waiting  the  judgment  of  Rome,  was  induced  by  a  deputation 
from  the  African  synod,  not  only  to  approve  their  decrees,  but 
to  enact  a  very  severe  law  against  the  Pelagians,  ordering  all 
that  should  be  convicted  of  this  heresy,  to  be  sent  into  exile. 
Add  to  all  this,  that  the  two  greatest  lights  qf  the  Latin  church, 
Jerom  and  Augustin,  whose  judgment  was  of  very  grea^ 
weight  all  over  the  west,  had  openly  declared  against  them.   ; ;, , 

The  pontiff  therefore  discovered,  though  late,  that  he  had 
been  precipitate,  and  had  (through  an  excessive  attachment  t,& 
what  in  the  main  would  be  admitted  by  politicians  to  be  a  wis« 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY*  ^3^ 

irittiaxim)  engaged  in  a  desperate  cause,  and  had  so  many  and 
ftowerful'  enemies  to  encbuntet*,  Sis  the  papacy,  in  so  early  a 
period,  was  not  a  match  for.  It  was  become,  therefore,  abso- 
lutely necessary  for  him  to  retreat,  lest,  by  grasping  unseasona- 
bly at  too  much,  he  should  lose  every  thing,  and  even  be 
deserted  by  those  who,  on  bth^r  Occasions,  firmly  supported 
him.  Thiis  he  endeavouired  tO  do  with  the  best  grace  he  could  ; 
but  to  do  it  with  a  good  grace  wais  impbsisible.  Accordingly, 
he  was  at  length  under  a  necessity  tb  anathetnatize  as  ithpious, 
what  he  had  formerly,  in  the  most  explicit  tehhs,  pronounced^ 
innocent.  In  the  whole  affair,  Rome  evidentlj"  showed  the 
truth  of  an  observation  I  formerly  made,  that  with  hei-,  doc- 
trine was  ever  but  a  matter  of  siecoridary  consideration,  the 
primary  object  was  invariably  pb^fer. 

The  conduct  of  ZozimuS,  on  the  appeal  of  Apiarius,  a  pre&° 
byter  of  Sica,  in  Africa,  who  had  been  deposed  and  excom- 
municated foir  several  heirious  crimes,  was  very  remarkable^ 
The  pope,  without  so  much  as  hearing  his  adversaries,  restored 
hfm  not  only  to  the  communion  of  the  church,  but  to  the  rank 
frbm  which  he  had  been  degraded.  The  vile  arts  bf  lying  and 
forgery,  which,  on  this  occasion^  were  employed  by  the  holy 
see,  never  weakly  scrupulous  about  means,  and  the  cotnpromises 
which  the  African  bishops,  though  not  deceived  by  papal  arti- 
fices, were,  for  peace  sake,  compelled  to  make  ;  the  second 
deposition  of  that  irreclaimable  profligate,  his  second  appeal  tb 
Rbme,  and  his  second  hasty  restoration  by  popie  C destine^ 
without  hearing  his  accusers,  the  methbds  taken  by  Rorne  to 
patronise  and  reinstate  him,  and  the  defeat  of  those  methods^ 
by  the  explicit  confession,  which,  in  an  African  synod,  the  cul- 
prit made,  of  the  most  atrocious  crimes,  tb  the  unspeakable 
Cbnfusioh  of  the  pope's  legate^  Sent  to  defend  his  innocence  ; 
all  these,  I  say,  furnish  a  scene,  wherein  the  very  arcatia  of 
Roman  policy  may  be  thoroughly  penetrated  by  the  discerning 
mind.  Nothing  could  tnore  clearly  demonstrate,  than  did  thei 
conduct  of  Rome  in  the  whole  tt-ansaction,  that  she  paid  no 
more  regard  tO  guilt  or  ihnbcence,  in  the  judgments  she  prb* 
iibunced,  than  she  did  to  truth  or  falsehood,  in  the  itieans  she 
employed*  With  no  person  or  slate  did  the  maxim,  ascribed 
by  Suetbhiu^  tb  Julius  Csesar,  more  exactly  cjiiadrate  than  with 
the  see  of  Rome.  "  Si  violahdum  est  jus^  reg;nandi  gratia  vio'i 
>*  landiim  est,  aliis  rebus  pietateih  colasi"  With  her  all  was 
just,  and  all  was  true,  that  promoted  the  great  object,  power  j 
all  was  false,  and  all  was  criminal,  that  opposed  it.  Indeed^ 
the  black  confession  which  Apiarius  publickly  madcj  of  crimes 
judged  too  shocking  to  be  recorded,  tetided  to  give  but  a  very 
*i*ifavourable  impression  rf  the  decisions  of  a  tribunal,  since 


23^  LECTURES  ON 

called  infallible.  For  let  it  be  observed,  that  this  man  at  Rome 
was  twice  absolved  as  guiltless,  (both  times  indeed  without  a 
trial)  first  by  pope  Zozimus,  then  by  pope  Celestine,  both  now 
worshipped  as  saints  by  the  Romanists. 

It  were  easy  to  show,  were  it  proper  to  descend  into  mor^j 
particulars,  that  the  conduct  of  Leo,  on  occasion  of  the  appeal 
of  Celedonius,  of  Besancon,  from  the  diocesan  synod  of  Aries, 
in  reversing  their  sentence,  restoring  the  deposed  bishop,  and 
the  procedure  of  the  pontiff  soon  after  against  Hilarius,  bishop 
cf  Aries,  and  exarch  of  the  seven  Narbonnese  provinces,  who 
had  presided  at  the  synod  above-mentioned  ;  whom  he  not 
only  cut  off  from  his  communion,  and,  as  far  as  in  him  lay,  de- 
graded, but  every  where  defamed  by  his  letters,  were  equally 
precipitate,  unjust,  and  scandalous.  In  this  attempt,  however, 
on  the  rights  of  the  Gailican  church,  Rome  seems  to  have  been 
more  successful,  through  a  peculiar  felicity  in  the  juncture, 
than  in  those  formerly  made  on  the  churches  of  Africa.  The 
prince  then  upon  the  throne,  Valentinian  the  third,  was  both 
weak  and  credulous,  and  one  over  whom  the  pontiff  appears 
to  have  had  an  unlimited  influence.  The  pope,  therefore,  on 
this  occasion,  glad  to  recur  to  the  secular  arm,  easily  obtained 
from  the  emperour  a  rescript,  exactly  in  the  terms  he  desired, 
confirming  ail  that  he  had  done,  commanding  all  the  Gailican 
bishops  to  yield  implicit  obedience  to  the  decrees  and  awards 
of  the  pontiff,  and  enjoining  the  magistrates  of  the  several 
provinces  to  interpose  their  authority,  in  compelling  those  who 
should  be  summoned  to  Rome  to  obey  the  summons.  Many 
attempts  were  used  by  Hilarius  to  effect  a  reconciliation ;  but 
he  found  it  was  utterly  impracticable,  except  on  such  condi- 
tions as  an  honest  man  will  ever  account  totally  unworthy  of 
regard,  the  sacrifice  of  truth,  and  the  surrender  of  those  rights 
and  liberties  of  his  church  and  people,  with  which,  as  a  most 
sacred  depositum,  he  had  been  intrusted.  In  this  state,  there- 
fore, which  surely  a  modern  papist  would  think  desperate, 
unreconciled  to  Christ's  vicar,  and  as  a  rotten  member  cut  off 
from  the  body  of  the  faithful,  being  cutj  off  from  all  connexion 
with  the  church's  visible  head,  died  the  famous  Hilarius,  bi- 
shop of  Aries.  And  what  shall  we  say  of  Roman  consistency, 
when  we  reflect,  that  this  very  excommunicated,  cursed,  ana- 
thematized Hilarius,  (i  cannot  say  by  what  strange  oversight) 
as  well  as  pope  Leo,  who,  to  the  last,  treated  him  in  the  man- 
ner we  have  seen,  are  both  at  present  first  rate  saints  in  the 
Roman  kalendar  ?  What  account  can  the  Romish  church  give 
of  this  ?  If  you  be  curious  to  know,  you  may  consult  Baronius, 
or  any  other  of  the  hireling  writers  of  that  communion,  whose 
business  in  brief  it  was  to  explain  nonsense,  darken  facts,  con- 
found the  judgment,  and  reconcile  contradictions. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  237 

In  what  further  concerns  the  matter  of  appeals,  I  shall  only, 
\yithout  multiplying  instances,  refer  you  to  what  happened  in 
the,  cases  of  Talia,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  charged  with  simony 
and  peijury  ;  the  two  Gallican  bishops,  Salonius  and  Sagitta- 
rius, who  had  been  convicted,  before  a  synod  at  Lyons,  of  the 
crimes  only  of  murder,  adultery,  robbery,  and  house-breaking, 
but  whose  merit  in  appealing  to  the  apostolick  see  cancell'ed  all 
in  an  instant,  and  procured,  without  further  inquiry,  a  declara- 
tion of  their  innocence,  and  restoration  to  their  bishopricks; 
and  who,  (1  speak  of  the  two  last)  in  confidence  of  their  secu- 
rity under  the  pope's  protection,  soon  relapsed  into  the  same 
enormities,  were  deposed  a  second  time,  and  shut  up  in  a  mo- 
nastery to  prevent  a  second  recurrence  to  Rome.  You  may 
observe,  also,  the  case  of  Hadrian,  bishop  of  Thebes,  in  Thes- 
saly  ;  of  Honoratus,  archdeacon  of  Saloni,  in  Dalmatia ;  that 
of  John,  bishop  of  Lappa,  in  Crete  ;  and  that  of  Wilfrid,  of 
York,  in  England.  For  many  centuries  you  will  find,  that  the 
judgment  of  the  apostolick  see,  as  it  affected  to  be  styled,  in 
contradistinction  to  others,  was  uniformly  in  favour  of  the 
appellant. 

If  history  had  given  us  no  information  about  the  persons,  or 
cases,  there  would  still  be  a  strong  presumption  that,  in  so 
considerable  a  number,  some  had  deserved  the  treatment  they 
had  received  from  the  provincial,  diocesan,  or  national  synod^ 
to  which  they  had  belonged.  As  the  matter  stands,  there  is 
the  clearest  historical  evidence,  that  the  far  greater  part  of 
them  had  been  justly  degraded,  and  could  never  have  obtained 
the  patronage  or  countenance  of  any  power,  which  did  not 
make  every  consideration  of  religion  and  equity  give  way  to 
her  ambition. 

What  but  this  favourite  maxim  can  account  for  the  many 
falsehoods  and  forgeries,  to  which  she  so  often  recurred,  in 
support  of  her  exorbitant  claims.  The  ignorance  and  super- 
stition of  the  dark  ages  that  ensued,  (for  those  I  have  had 
occasion  to  refer  to  in  this,  and  my  two  preceding  lectures, 
are  but  as  the  evening  twilight,  compared  with  those  which 
followed)  soon  gave  scope  for  attempting  the  very  grossest 
kinds  of  imposition.  And  the  friends  and  patrons  of  the 
hierarchy  were  not  remiss  in  using  the  opportunity  while  it 
lasted.  The  fruits  of  their  diligence,  in  this  way,  were  ficti-r 
tious  councils  as  well  as  canons,  and  fictitious  decrees  of  real 
councils,  false  deeds  of  gift,  such  as  the  instrument  of  dona- 
tion of  Rome  and  all  Italy,  made,  as  was  pretended,  by  the 
emperour  Constantine  to  pope  Sylvester,  and  his  successours 
in  the  popedom,  the  decretal  epistles  of  the  popes,  not  to  men- 
tion the  little  legerdemain  tricks  of  false  miracles,  and  other 


238  LECTURE'S  Ol^^ 

such  like  artifices.  For  the  lying  spirit,  which  had  ^dtteti 
possession  of  the  head,  quickly  diffused  itself  throughout  the 
members ;  and  every  petty  priest  supported  his  particular 
credit  among  the  people  by  the  same  arts,  exhibited,  as  it 
were,  in  miniature^  which  were  on  a  larger  scale  displayed  by 
the  pontiff,  for  the  support  of  the  great  hierarchal  empire.  It 
must  be  owned^  the  greater  part  of  their  forgeries,  especially 
Constantine's  donation,  and  the  decretal  epistles,  are  such 
barefaced  impostures,  and  so  bunglingly  executed,  that  nothing 
less  than  the  most  profound  darkness  of  those  ages  could 
account  for  their  success.  They  are  manifestly  written  in  the 
barbarous  dialect,  which  obtained  in  the  eighth  and  ninth  cen- 
turies, and  exhibit  those  poor,  meek,  and  humble  teachers, 
who  came  immediately  after  the  apostles,  as  blustering,  swag- 
gering, and  dictating  to  the  world  in  the  authoritative  tone  of 
a  Zachary,  or  a  Stephen. 

But  however  gross  the  artifices  were,  they  were  well  suited 
to  the  grossness  of  the  people,  in  times  wherein  almost  all 
vestiges  of  literature  and  arts  were  buried  in  the  ruins  of  the 
fallen  empire.  These  acts  and  decretals  had  accordingly,  for 
several  centuries,  a  powerful  effect  in  imposing  on  mankind  ; 
an  effect  which  continued,  whilst  its  continuance  was  of  prin- 
cipal moment,  when  all  the  little  remains  of  knowledge  in  the 
world  were  in  the  hands  of  those,  who  considered  it  as  their 
interest  to  deceive  the  people,  and  keep  them  in  ignorance. 
Thus  the  progress,  as  well  as  the  coming,  of  this  power,  has 
been  indeed  after  the  working  of  Satan,  in  signs  and  lying 
wonders,  and  all  deceivableness  of  unrighteousness. 

Indeed,  such  sacrifices  of  truth  to  what  was  called  the  cause 
of  the  church  have  always  been  regarded  as  among  the  most 
harmless  of  their  innumerable  expedients.  The  term  pious 
fraud  was,  in  most  places,  and  for  several  ages,  not  introduced 
sarcastically,  as  it  is  used  with  us  at  present  *,  nor  was  it  ima- 
gined to  connect  ideas  incompatible  with  each  other ;  but  em- 
ployed to  denote  an  artifice  not  only  innocent  but  commenda- 
ble. The  patrons  of  sacerdotal  power  had  every  advantage 
therefore  :  their  tricks,  when  undiscovered,  wrought  power- 
fully in  their  favour ;  and  when  discovered,  (such  was  the 
woful  superstition  of  the  times)  were,  on  account  of  the  sup- 
posed holy  purpose  to  be  effected  by  them,  easily  excused  by 
all,  and  highly  approved  by  many. 

It  is  true,  that  now,  since  the  restoration  of  letters,  men's 
sentiments,  on  these  subjects,  are  very  much  altered.  Those 
graceless  devices  have  been,  for  the  most  part,  fully  detected 
and  exposed  ;  insomuch,  that  all  the  learned  and  ingenuous 
part,  even  of  Roman  catholicks,  quite  ashamed  of  them,  have 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  259 

Jong  since  abandoned  their  defence.  But  Rome  may  now 
laugh  at  a  detection,  which  can  never  restore  things  to  the 
state  they  were  in  before  those  frauds  were  employed.  What 
has  been  at  first  produced  solely  by  imposture,  comes,  through 
the  slow  but  sure  operation  pf  time  and  immemorial  custom, 
to  acquire  a  stability  totally  independent  of  its  origin.  When 
that  is  the  case,  the  discovery  is  not  able  to  shake  the  fabrick, 
to  which  the  imposture  originally  gave  a  being.  Antiquity 
supplies  the  place  of  truth.  Custom  rules  the  world,  and  is 
the  principal  foundation  of  obedience  in  all  the  governments 
that  are,  and  ever  were,  upon  the  earth.  It  is  but  one  of  a 
thousand  that  is  capable  of  examining  into  the  origin  of  things : 
the  remaining  nine  hundred  and  ninety-nine  have  no  reason  to 
assign  for  their  obedience  but  custom,  or  what  they  are  wont  to 
see  exacted  on  the  one  hand,  and  complied  with  on  the  other, 
A  set  of  customs,  gradually  established,  may,  in  like  manner, 
be  gradually  abolished ;  but  the  discoveries  of  the  learned 
(though  not  totally  ineffective)  have  not  a  very  sudden,  and  a 
very  sensible  effect  upon  them. 

I  shall,  in  my  next  lecture,  proceed  to  illustrate,  in  other 
instances,  the  particular  attention  which  Rome  invariably  gave 
to  the  great  object,  power  ;  and  consider  how  far  the  very  best 
pf  her  pontiffs  sacrificed  every  other  consideration  to  its  ad- 
yapcement. 


^40  LECTURES  ON 


LECTURE  XVL 


1  •»(,". 

'■.rft 


I 


PROCEED,  in  this  lecture,  to  illustrate^in  other  instance§^ 
the  particular  attention  which  Rome  invariably  gave  to  the 
great  object,  power.  The  proof  that  I  am  now  to  produce  is 
different  in  kind  from  the  former,  but  still  corroborative  of  the 
same  capital  point  in  her  policy,  which  was  to  make  every  con»^ 
sideration  of  truth  and  right  give  place  to  her  ambition,        ■  ■'■<', 

For  this  purpose,  I  shall  not  recur  to  those  pontiffs,  who  were 
far  from  reaching  even  the  low  standard  of  virtue,  recom- 
mended in  the  latter  part  of  the  Julian  maxim,  aliis  rebus  pie- 
iatem  colas.  And  that  there  were  popes,  who,  in  no  part  of 
their  conduct,  showed  that  they  either  feared  God,  or  regarded 
men,  all  persons,  popish  and  protestant,  who  have  the  least  ac- 
quaintance with  church  history,  will  readily  admit.  But  I  shall 
recur  to  one,  who  was  thought,  as  much  as  any  that  ever  sat  in, 
the  papal  chair,  to  mind  the  better  part  of  the  apophthegm, 
and  was  observant  of  piety,  equity^  and  charity,  in  cases  which 
did  not  interfere  with  the  favourite  pursuit ;  and  shall  clearly 
evince,  that  he  was  not  a  less  rigid  observer  of  the  former  part 
of  it,  regnandi  gratia  jus  violandum  est ;  that  he  did  not  hesitate 
at  any  means,  falsehood,  and  injustice,  the  prostitution  of  reli- 
gion, and  of  the  most  sacred  rites  of  humanity,  when  these 
could  be  rendered  instrumental  in  promoting  the  primary  papal 
object,  POWER. 

The  pope  I  intend  to  produce  as  an  example,  is  no  other 
than  Gregory  the  first,  a  man  at  present  adored  in  the  church 
of  Rome,  as  one  of  her  most  eminent  saints,  and  respected  as 
one  of  her  most  learned  doctors.  The  Greeks,  I  know,  were 
wont  to  style  him,  (as  it  v/ould  seem)  contemptuously,  Gregory 
Dialogue,  on  account  of  some  silly  dialogues  which  he  wrote. 
Yet  even  those  are  not  inferiour  to  some  of  the  productions  of 
their  own  approved  authors  in  the  same  period.  His  pontifi- 
cate commenced  towards  the  end  of  the  sixth  century,  and 
extended  to  the  beginning  of  the  seventh. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  241 

Who  knows  not  the  extraordinary  zeal  which  this  pope  mani- 
fested against  the  Constaniinopolitan  patriarch,  who  in  those 
days  began  to  assume  the  title  of  universal  bishop  ?  For  who 
is  so  great  an  enemy  to  the  pride  and  ambition  of  others  as 
the  proud  and  ambitious  !  That  a  relentless  jealousy  was 
at  the  bottom  of  the  violence  which  he  showed  on  that 
occasion,  there  was  no  considerate  and  impartial  person 
who  did  not  discern  then,  and  there  is  none  of  this  cha- 
racter who  does  not  discern  still.  It  v/ere  unnecessary  here 
to  mention  all  the  odious  epithets,  by  which  he  stigmatized 
that  obnoxious  appellation.  Suffice  it  to  observe,  in  general, 
that  he  maintained  strenuously,  that  whoever  assumed  that 
heretical,  blasphemous,  and  infernal  title,  (so  he  expressly 
terms  it)  was  the  follower  of  Lucifer,  the  forerunner  and  herald 
of  Antichrist,  and  that  it  neither  did  nor  could  belong  to  any 
bishop  whatever.  He  had  nothing,  it  appears,  of  the  pro 
phetick  spirit,  else  he  would  have  spoken  more  cautiously  of 
a  title  so  soon  afterwards  assumed  by  some  of  his  own  succes-^ 
sours.  It  must  be  owned,  indeed,  that  in  this  conduct  the 
Grecian  patriarch  was  the  precursor  of  the  Romish.  If  there-. 
by,  the  pope  is  rendered  antichrist,  it  is  a  deduction  from  pope 
Gregory's  reasoning,  and  not  from  mine. 

Gregory,  when  that  title  was  first  assumed  at  Constantino- 
ple, was  quite  indefatigable  in  his  applications  by  letter,  and  by 
the  intervention  of  his  nuncios,  with  the  patriarch,  himself,  and 
with  the  emperour,  to  effect  the  suppression  of  it.  But  all  was 
to  no  purpose.  The  matter  could  never  be  made  appear  to 
them  as  of  that  moment,  which  Gregory  was  so  immoderately 
solicitous  to  give  it.  They  considered  it  only  (like  most  of 
the  titles  then  conferred  on  the  potentates  of  the  church)  as  a 
Gomplimental  and  respectful  manner  of  address,  well  befittingp 
the  bishop  of  the  imperial  city.  Rome's  remonstrances  were 
accordingly  made  light  of.  The  other  patriarchs,  particularly 
the  Antiochian  and  the  Alexandrian,  Gregory  endeavoured, 
by  all  possible  means,  but  to  no  purpose,  to  engage  in  the  quar- 
rel. The  bishop  of  Alexandria,  probably  with  a  vieAV  to  mollify 
his  incensed  brother  at  Rome,  gave  him  a  title,  which  he 
thought  would  be  deemed  equivalent,  calling  him  universal 
pope.  But  his  holiness  had  proceeded  too  far  to  be  taken  in 
by  so  simple  a  device,  and  therefore  he  did  not  hesjtate  to  re- 
ject it  with  disdain,  as  being  in  the  same  way  derogatory,  with 
the  other  title,  to  the  whole  episcopal  order.  He  did  more  : 
for,  in  order  to  show  how  different  a  spirit  he  was  of,  he  as- 
sumed, for  the  first  time,  (and  herein  he  has  been  followed  by 
his  successours)  this  humble  addition,  the  servant  of  the  ser- 
vants of  God:  servus  servorum  Dei.     We  have  heard  of  pco- 

H  h 


242  LECTURES  ON 

pie's  making  humility  the  subject  of  their  vanity,  and  mortifi- 
cation the  ground  of  their  pride.  The  pharisees  were  osten- 
tatious ot  their  dirty  and  disfigured  faces  when  they  fasted, 
and  tiiere  are  even  some  christian  sects  who  seem  to  make  the 
pharisees,  in  this  respect,  their  pattern.  The  pope  always 
since,  to  this  day,  introduces  his  bulls  with  the  modest  title 
assumed  by  Gregory.  One  would  expect  from  it,  that  they 
should  consist  only  of  entreaties,  and  lowlv  petitions,  to  those 
whom  he  acknowledges  to  be  his  supcriours,  and  his  masters. 
Instead  of  this,  you  find  him  commanding  imperiously,  even 
with  menaces,  denunciations,  and  curses.  Is  this  like  a  ser- 
vant to  his  masters  ?  If  we  could  consider  the  title,  therefore, 
as  any  thing  but  words,  we  should  pronounce  the  using  it  as  a 
sort  of  refinement  in  the  display  of  power ;  adding  insult  to 
tyranny,  like  those  despots,  who,  when  they  are  inflicting  tor- 
tures on  their  slave,  mock  him  with  the  title  of  sovereign  and 
lord. 

About  this  time  the  emperour  Mauricius,  whom  the  pope 
could  by  no  arts  prevail  on  to  enter  into  his  views,  nay,  whom 
he  found  rather  favourable  to  the  use  of  a  title,  by  which  an 
honourable  distinction  was  conferred  on  the  bishop  of  the  im- 
perial residence,  was  first  dethroned,  and  then  murdered,  by  a 
centurion,  one  of  his  subjects  and  soldiers,  who  usurped  his 
throne.  The  usurper  Phocas  (for  that  was  his  name)  was  a 
man  stained  with  those  vices,  which  serve  most  to  blacken  hu- 
man nature.  Other  tyrants  have  been  cruel  from  policy,  and 
through  want  of  regard  to  justice  and  humanity  ;  the  cruelties 
of  Phocas  are  not  to  be  accounted  for,  but  on  the  hypothesis 
of  the  most  diabolical  and  disinterested  malice.  Witness  the 
inhuman  manner  wherein  he  massacred  five  of  his  predeces- 
sor's children,  all  that  were  then  in  his  power,  before  the 
eyes  of  the  unhappy  father,  whom  he  reserved  to  the  last,  that 
he  might  be  a  spectator  of  the  destruction  of  his  family  before 
his  death.  The  slaughter  of  the  brother,  and  of  the  only  re- 
maining son  of  the  emperour  Mauricius,  with  all  the  patricians 
of  any  name  who  adhered  to  his  interest,  the  methods  by  which 
Phocas  got  the  empress  Constantina,  and  her  three  daugh- 
ters, into  his  power,  with  the  murder  of  whom  he  closed  the 
bloody  scene,  manifest  a  mind  totally  corrupted,  incapable  of 
being  wrought  upon  by  any  principle  of  religion,  sense  of  jus- 
tice,  or  sentiment  of  humanity. 

Unluckily  for  the  Constantinopolitan  patriarch,  the  innocent 
consort  of  his  late  sovereign,  with  the  three  princesses,  her 
daughters,  had  taken  refuge  in  one  of  the  churches  of  the  city. 
The  prelate,  moved  partly  by  compassion  to  the  royal  sufFet- 
ers,  partly  by  the  reverence  of  the  place,  would  not  permit 
them  to  be  dragged  by  force  from  their  asylum  ;  but  defended 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  243 

them,  whilst  there,  with  great  spirit  and  resolution.  The  ty- 
rant, one  of  the  most  vindictive  and  inexorable  of  mankind,  and 
who  could  therefore  ill  brook  this  spirited  opposition  from  the 
priest,  thought  it  prudent  then  to  dissemble  his  resentment,  as 
it  would  have  been  exceedingly  dangerous,  in  the  beginning 
of  his  reign,  to  alarm  the  church.  And  he  well  knew  how  im- 
portant and  even  venerable  a  point  it  was  accounted,  to  pre- 
serve inviolate  the  sacredness  of  such  sanctuaries.  He  de- 
sisted, therefore,  from  using  force  ;  and,  by  means  of  the  most 
solemn  oaths,  and  promises  of  safety,  prevailed  at  length  upon 
the  ladies  to  quit  their  asylum.  In  consequence  of  which, 
they  soon  after  became  the  helpless  victims  of  his  fury,  and 
suffered  on  the  same  spot  whereon  the  late  emperour,  and  five 
of  his  sons,  had  been  murdered  a  short  while  before. 

Now  what  should  we  expect  would  be  the  reception,  which 
the  accounts  of  this  unnatural  rebellion,  the  dethronement  of 
Mauricius,  the  horrid  butchery  of  the  whole  imperial  family, 
the  usurpation  and  coronation  of  such  a  sanguinary  fiend  as 
Phocas,  would  meet  with  at  Rome,  from  a  man  so  celebrated 
for  piety,  equity,  and  mildness  of  disposition,  as  pope  Grego- 
ry ?  Look  into  his  letters  of  congratulation  on  the  occasion, 
and  you  will  find  them  stuiFed  with  the  most  nauseous  adula- 
tion. Were  we  to  learn  the  character  of  Phocas  only  from  St. 
Gregory,  we  should  conclude  him  to  have  been  rather  an  angel 
than  a  man.  But  if  we  recur  to  facts,  if  we  take  our  Sav  iour's 
rule,  and  judge  of  the  tree  by  the  fruits,  (and  I  know  no  rule 
we  can  so  safely  follow)  we  shall  rather  conclude  him  to  have 
been  a  devil  incarnate.  The  actions,  on  which  this  judgment 
is  founded,  are  not  only  incontrovertible,  but  uncontroverted. 
You  may  read  the  account  that  is  given  of  the  earliest  and  the 
principal  of  these  murders,  by  Gregory  himself,  in  the  pream- 
ble to  the  eleventh  book  of  his  epistles  ;  where,  to  say  the 
truth,  they  are  recited  with  as  much  coolness,  as  though  they 
were  matters  of  the  utmost  indifference,  and  as  though  religion 
and  morality  could  be  nowise  affected  by  such  enormities. 

Observe,  then,  in  what  manner  the  sanctity  of  a  Gregory 
congratulates  the  blood-thirsty,  but  successful,  rebel,  regicide, 
and  usurper.  I  shall  give  you  a  specimen  of  his  manner  in 
his  own  words.  (!,•  11,  Ep.  360  The  classical  scholar  will 
make  the  proper  allowances  for  the  low  latinity  of  the  seventh 
century.  "  Gregorius  Phocse  Augusto."  His  exordium  is, 
*'  Gloria  in  excelsis  Deo,  qui  juxta  quod  scriptum  est,  mutat 
*'  tempora  et  transfert  regna :  et  quia  hoc  cunctis  innotuit, 
"  quod  per  prophetara  suum  loqui  dignatus  est,  dicens.  Quia 
*^dominatur  excelsus  in  regno  hominum,  et  cui  voluerit,  ipse 
"  dat  illud."     After  this  preamble,  he  observes,  that  God,  in 


244  LECTURES  ON 

his  incomprehensible  providence,  sometimes  sends  kings  to 
afRict  his  people,  and  punish  them  for  their  sins.  This,  says 
he,  we  have  known  of  late  to  our  woful  experience.  Some- 
times, on  the  other  hand,  God,  in  his  mercy,  raises  good  men 
to  the  throne  for  the  relief  and  exultation  of  his  servants. 
Then  applying  his  remark  to  the  present  juncture,  he  adds, 
"  De  qua  exultationis  abundantia,  roborari  nos  citius  credi- 
"  mus,  qui  benignitatem  pietatis  vestrae  ad  imperiale  fasti- 
"  gium  pervenisse  gaudemus."-^rhen  breaking  out  in  a  rap- 
ture, no  longer  to  be  restrained,  he  exclaims,  '*  Laetentur  coeli 
"•  et  exultet  terra,  et  de  vestris  benignis  actibus,  universse  rei- 
"  publicse  populus  nunc  usque  vehementer  afflictus  hilarescat. 
*'  Comprimantur  jugo  dominationis  vestrse  superbse  mentes 
"  hostium.  Releventur  vestra  misericordia  contriti  et  depres- 
*'  si  animi  subjectorum."  Proceeding  to  paint  their  former 
miseries,  he  concludes  with  wishing,  that  the  commonwealth 
may  long  enjoy  the  present  happiness.  A  few  instances,  and 
but  a  few,  of  the  benignity,  and  piety,  and  mercy,  of  this  em- 
perour,  here  so  highly  extolled  by  Gregory,  may  be  learnt 
from  the  the  treatment  above  related,  given  to  his  predeces- 
sor's family.  Another  letter  to  Phocas,  written  soon  after, 
the  pope  begins  in  this  manner.  (Ep.  43.)  "  Considerare  cum 
*••  gaudiis  et  magnis  actionibus  gratiarum  libet,  quantas  omni- 
"  potenti  Domino  laudes  debemus,  quod  remoto  jugo  tristitiae 
"  ad  libertatis  tempora  sub  imperiali  benignitatis  vestr»  pietate 
"  pervenimus."  His  not  having  a  nuncio  at  Constantinople,at 
the  time  of  the  emperour's  accession,  he  excuses  from  the  in- 
supportable tyranny  of  the  former  reign,  and  concludes  in  this 
manner :  "  Sancta  itaque  Trinitas  vitam  vestram  per  tempora 
'■'  longa  custodiat,  ut  de  bono  vestrae  pietatis  quod  tarde  susci- 
"  pimus  diutius  gaudeamus." 

"  As  a  subject,  and  a  christian,"  says  Mr.  Gibbon*,  "  it 
"  was  the  duty  of  Gregory  to  acquiesce  in  the  established 
*^  government ;  but  the  joyful  applause  with  which  he  salutes 
"•  the  fortune  of  the  assassin,  has  sullied  with  indelible  disgrace, 
"  the  character  of  the  saint.  The  successour  of  the  apostles 
*'  might  have  inculcated,  with  decent  firmness,  the  guilt  of 
"  blood,  and  the  necessity  of  repentance  :  he  is  content  to  cele- 
*■'■  brate  the  deliverance  of  the  people,  and  the  fall  of  the 
*'  oppressor ;  to  rejoice  that  the  piety  and  benignity  of 
*'  Phocas  have  been  raised  by  Providence  to  the  imperial 
"  throne  ;  to  pray  that  his  hands  may  be  strengthened  against 
"  all  his  enemies  ;  and  to  express  a  wish,  that,  after  a  long  tri- 
"  umphant  rftign,  he  may  be  transferred  from  a  temporal  to  an 
*'  everlasting  kingdom."     He  proceeds  ; — '■'  I  have  traced  the 

*  Historjr,  chap.  xlvi. 


ECCI.ESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  245 

"  steps  of  a  revolution,  so  pleasing,  in  Gregory's  opinion,  both. 
♦*  to  heayen  and  eanh  ;  and  Phocas  does  not  appear  less  hate- 
"  ful  in  the  exercise  than  in  the  acquisition  of  power.  The 
"  pencil  of  an  impartial  historian  has  delineated  the  portrait 
*'  of  a  monster,  his  diminutive  and  deformed  person,  &c.  Ig- 
"  norant  of  letters,  of  laws,  and  even  of  arms,  he  indulged,  ia 
*'  the  supreme  rank,  a  more  ample  privilege  of  lust  and  drunk- 
*'  enness  ;  and  his  brutal  pleasures  were  either  injurious  to 
"  his  subjects,  or  disgraceful  to  himself.  Without  assuming 
*'  the  office  of  a  prince,  he  renounced  the  profession  ot  a  soi- 
"  dier  ;  and  the  reign  of  Phocas  afflicted  Europe  with  ignomi- 
**  nious  peace,  and  Asia  with  desolating  war.  His  savage 
*'  temper  was  inflamed  by  passion,  hardened  by  fear,  exaspe- 
"  rated  by  resistance  or  reproach.  The  flight  of  Theodosius, 
"  the  only  surviving  son  of  Mauritius,  to  the  Persian  court, 
"  had  been  intercepted  by  a  rapid  pursuit,  or  a  deceitful  mes- 
"  sage  :  he  was  beheaded  at  Nice  ;  and  the  last  hours  of  the 
"  young  prince  were  soothed  by  the  comforts  of  religion,  and 
"  the  consciousness  of  innocence." 

Now  that  we  may  be  satisfied,  that  all  Gregory's  fulsome  and 
detestable  flattery  was  not  without  a  view,  we  need  only  peruse 
the  congratulatory  letter  to  the  empress  Leontia,  immediately 
following ;  for,  by  this  channel,  he  thought  it  most  prudent  to 
suggest,  for  the  first  time,  the  distinguishing  favour  he  expect- 
ed they  would  show,  in  return,  to  the  see  of  St.  Peter,  as  the 
popes  had  now,  for  some  centuries,  affected  to  denominate  the 
church  planted  at  Rome.  He  begins  this,  as  the  other  letters 
above-mentioned,  with  such  high  strains  of  praise  and  thanks- 
giving, as  suited  only  the  birth  of  the  Messiah  :  his  expres- 
sions are  generally  borrowed  from  those  used  in  scripture,  ia 
relation  to  that  memorable  event ;  and  he  never  forgets  to  con- 
trast the  present  happiness  with  the  evil  times  which  had  pre- 
ceded. "  Reddatur  ergo  creatori  omnium  ab  hymnidicis  ange- 
"  lorum  choris,  gloria  in  coelo,  persolvatur  ab  omnibus  gratia- 
"  rum  actio  in  terra,  &c." 

His  manner  of  applying  to  this  lady  is  indeed  very  artfuL 
After  recommending  to  her,  and  her  most  pious  lord,  the  see 
of  the  blessed  apostle  Peter,  he  signifies  his  persuasion,  that 
what  he  had  said  was  quite  unnecessary,  that  their  own  piety- 
must  have  suggested  the  same  thing  to  them  before.  He  take* 
notice  of  the  great  prerogatives  of  Peter  in  such  a  manner, 
(which  was  now  become  common  at  Rome,  though  no  where 
else  in  the  church)  as  though  they  had  been  his  peculiarly  ; 
namely,  the  founding  of  the  universal  church,  the  power  of  the 
keys,  the  power  of  retaining  sins,  and  of  remitting  them,  or 
of  binding  and  loosing;  whence  he  takes  occasion  indirectly, 


^46  LECTURES  ON 

but  with  great  address,  to  insinuate,  that  their  hopes  of  those 
favours,  whicn  none  bat  Peter  could  bestow,  must  be  in  propor- 
tion to  their  zeal  for  his  honour.  "  Unde  nobis  dubium  non 
"  est,  quam  forti  amore  ad  eum  vos  stringitis,  per  quern  soivi 
*■'■  ab  omnibus  peccatorum  nexibus  desideratis.  Ipse  ergo  sit 
"■  vestri  custos  imperii ;  sit  vobis  protector  in  terra,  sit  pro  vo- 
"  bis  intercessor  in  coelo."  It  was  then  from  Peter  only  they 
were  to  expect  remission.  To  his  guardianship  their  govern- 
ment was  recommended,  and  their  persons  to  his  protection  on 
the  earth,  and  intercession  in  heaven.  There  is  (you  must 
know)  much  less  word  of  the  providence  and  protection  of 
God,  and  of  the  intercession  of  Jesus  Christ,  now  that  people 
had  got  themselves  so  liberally  provided  in  guardians,  protec- 
tors, and  intercessours,  among  the  saints.  The  abuse  thrown 
with  such  an  unsparing  hand  on  the  unfortunate  emperour,  who 
had  preceded,  as  though  he  had  been  one  of  the  worst  of  ty- 
rants, naturally  leads  one  to  inquire  into  his  'character.  The 
fault,  of  which  he  is  principally  accused  by  contemporary  histo- 
rians, and  which,  doubtless,  proved  the  cause  of  his  untimely 
fate,  was  too  much  parsimony  :  than  which,  no  vice  could  ren- 
der him  more  odious  to  the  soldiery,  who  were,  in  those  de- 
generate times  of  the  empire,  lazy,  undisciplined,  debauched, 
rapacious,  and  seditious.  As  the  government  was  become 
militaiy,  the  affection  of  the  army  v/as  the  principal  bulwark  of 
the  throne.  It  was  ever  consequently  the  interest  of  the  reign- 
ing family,  to  secure  the  fidelity  of  the  legions  as  much  as 
possible.  This,  in  times  so  corrupt,  when  military  discipline 
was  extinct,  was  to  be  effected  only  by  an  unbounded  indul- 
gence, and  by  frequent  largesses.  These  the  prince  was  not  in 
a  condition  to  bestow,  without  laying  exorbitant  exactions  on 
the  people.  For  levying  these,  the  army  were,  as  long  as  they 
shared  in  the  spoil,  always  ready  to  lend  their  assistance. 
Hence  it  happened,  that  among  the  emperours,  the  greatest  op- 
pressors of  the  people  were  commonly  the  greatest  favourites 
of  the  annv.  The  revolt  of  the  legions,  therefore,  could  be  but 
a  slender  proof  of  mal-admini£tration.  It  was  even,  in  many 
cases,  an  evidence  of  the  contrary. 

But  it  is  more  to  our  present  purpose,  to  consider  the  charac- 
ter, which  this  very  pope  Gregory  gave  of  Mauricius,  when  in 
possession  of  the  imperial  diadem.  For  if  the  former  and  the 
latter  accounts,  given  by  the  pontiff,  cannot  be  rendered  con- 
sistent, we  must  admit,  that,  first  or  last,  his  holiness  made  a 
sacrifice  of  truth  to  politicks.  Now  it  is  certain,  that  nothing 
can  be  more  contradictory  than  those  accounts.  In  some  of 
his  letters  to  that  emperour,  you  will  find  the  man,  whom  he 
now  treats  as  a  perfect  monster,  extolled  to  the  skies,  as  one  of 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  247 

t^e  most  pious,  most  religious,  most  christian  princes,  that 
ever  lived ;  and  withal,  (which  deserves  particular  notice)  as  the 
most  gracious  and  bountiful.  In  proof  of  this,  I  could  adduce 
a  variety  of  passages  from  several  letters  of  the  pontiff,  written 
at  different  times,  some  earlier,  and  some  later.  Take  a  few 
for  a  specimen.  Let  the  first  be  (L.  5,  Kp.  63,;  to  Mauricius. 
'•'-  Inter  armorum  curas  et  innumeras  sollicitudines,  quas  inde- 
*'  fesso  studio,  pro  Christianas  reipublicse  regimine  sustinetis, 
*'  magna  mihi  cum  universo  mundo  laetitise  causa  est,  quod 
*'  piecas  vestra  custodi^  fidei,  qua  dominorum  fuiget  iraperium, 
*'  praecipua  sollicitudine  semper  invigilat.  Unde  omnino  con- 
"  tido,  quia  sicut  vos  Dei  causas  religiosse  mentis  amore  tue- 
*'  mini,  ita  Deus  vestras  majestatis  suae  gratia  tuetur  et  adju- 
*'  vat."  Here  the  emperour's  pious  zeal,  solicitude,  and  vigi- 
lance, for  the  preservation  of  the  christian  faith,  being  such  as 
no  publick  cares,  no  tumults  of  war,  could  ever  divert  his  atten- 
tion from,  are  represented  as  the  glory  of  his  reign,  as  a  sub- 
ject of  joy,  not  to  the  pontiff  only,  but  to  all  the  world.  Again, 
(L.  6.  Kp.  30,)  to  the  same,  he  concludes  in  these  words  : — 
"  Omnipotens  autem  Deus  serenissimi  domini  nostri  vitam,  et 
'*  ad  pacem  ecclesias  et  ad  utilitatem  reipublics  Romanae,  per 
"  tempora  longa  custodiat.  Certi  enim  suraus,  quia  si  vos  vivi- 
"  tis,  qui  cceli  dominum  timetis,  nulla  contra  veritatem  superba 
*'  prsevalere  permittitis."  Could  any  man  suspect,  that  one 
who  writes  in  so  earnest  a  manner,  did  not  entertain  the 
highest  opinion  of  the  emperour's  piety  and  zeal,  as  well  as  the 
most  fervent  wishes  for  his  welfare.  I  shall  produce  bvit  one 
other  example  (L.  8,  Ep.  2,)  to  the  same.  The  subject  of  the 
letter  is  thus  expressed  in  the  title  :  "  De  denarils  sancto  Petro 
**  transmissis."  After  the  warmest  expressions  of  gratitude, 
on  account  of  the  pious  liberality  and  munificence  of  his  impe- 
rial majesty,  and  after  telling  how  much  the  priests,  the  poor, 
the  strangers,  and  all  the  faithful,  were  indebted  to  his  pater- 
nal care,  he  adds,  "  Unde  actum  est,  ut  simul  omnes  pro  vita 
"  dominorum  concorditer  orarent,  quatenus  omnipotens  Deus. 
*'  longa  vobis  et  quieta  tempora  tribuat,  etpietatis  vestrse  faeli- 
*'  cissimam  sobolem  diu  in  Romana  republica  florere  conce- 
*'  dat."  Yet  he  no  sooner  hears,  which  was  not  long  after,  of 
the  successful  treason  of  Phocas,  in  the  barbarous  murder  of 
his  sovereign,  and  his  family,  an  event,  the  mention  of  which, 
even  at  this  distance,  makes  a  humane  person  shudder  with 
horrour,  than  he  exclaims,  with  rapture,  '*•  Glory  to  God  in  the 
*'  highest."  He  invites  heaven  and  earth,  men  angels,  to  join 
in  the  general  triumph.  How  happy  is  he,  that  the  royal  race 
is  totally  exterminated  ;  for  whom,  but  a  little  before,  he  told 
us,  that  he  poured  out  incessant  and  tearful  prayers,   riavhry" 


246  YHOTLECTURES  ON 

mabili  prece  is  one  of  his  expressions)  that  they  might,  to  latest 
ages,  flourish  on  the  throne,  for  the  felicity  of  the  Roman 
commonwealth.  Surely  truth  and  sincerity  had  no  part  in  this 
man's  system  of  morality 

An  honest  heathen  would  at  least,  for  some  time,  have 
avoided  any  intercourse  or  correspondence  with  such  a  ruffian 
as  Phocas  ;  but  this  christian  bishop,  before  he  had  the  regu- 
lar and  customary  notice  of  his  accession  to  the  purple,  is 
forward  to  congratulate  him  on  the  success  of  his  crimes. 
His  very  crimes  he  canonizes  (an  easy  matter  for  false  reli- 
gion to  effect)  and  transforms  into  shining  virtues,  and  the 
criminal  hiinself  into  what  I  may  call  a  second  Messiah,  he 
that  should  come  for  the  salvation  and  comfort  of  God's 
people.  And  all  this  was  purely  that  he  might  pre-engage 
the  favour  of  the  new  emperour,  who  (he  well  knew)  enter- 
tained a  secret  grudge  against  the  Constantinopolitan  bishop, 
for  his  attachment  to  the  preceding  emperour  Mauricius  ;  ^ 
grudge  which,  when  he  saw  with  what  spirit  the  patriarch 
protected  the  empress  dowager,  and  her  daughter,  soon 
settled  into  implacable  hatred. 

But  Gregory,  who  died  soon  after  the  aforesaid  revolution, 
did  not  live  to  reap  the  fruits  of  his  accursed  policy.  Indeed, 
Boniface  the  third,  the  next  but  one  who  succeeded  him  for 
the  pontificate  of  his  immediate  successour  was  very  short, 
did  very  soon  obtain  of  the  emperour  not  only  the  revocation 
of  the  edict,  by  which  the  title  of  universal  bishop  had  been 
conferred  on  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  but  the  issuing 
of  a  new  decree,  whereby  that  title  was  entailed  in  perpetuity 
on  the  Roman  pontiff,  who  was  vested  with  the  primacy  of 
all  the  bishops  of  the  empire.  And  the  church  of  Rome,  by 
accepting  these,  not  only  declared  that  she  derived  her  honours 
from  the  secular  powers,  but  proclaimed  herself,  in  the  opi- 
nion of  Gregory,  who  is  acknowledged  to  have  been  as  great 
a  pontiff  as  ever  filled  the  chair  of  St.  Peter,  to  be  vain- 
glorious, proud,  profane,  impious,  execrable,  blasphemous, 
antichristian,  heretical,  diabolical ;  for  these  are  some  of  the 
epithets  he  bestows  on  whosoever  shall  accept  the  title  of 
universal  bighop. 

Now  if  such  was  the  conduct  of  a  Gregory,  who,  it  must 
be  owned,  in  cases  wherein  their  politicks  did  not  interfere, 
appears  to  have  been  endowed  with  several  virtues  and  good 
qualities,  what  are  we  to  expect  from  other  popes  ?  We  need 
not  be  surprised,  that  a  Zachary,  in  the  middle  of  the  eighth 
century,  should,  for  the  interest  of  the  holy  see,  assist  with 
his  counsel,  and  countenance  the  usurper  Pepin,  to  depose  his 
master  and  benefactor  Childerick,  king  of  France,  with  all  his 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  249 

familv',  and  to  possess  himself  of  his  crown  and  kingdom  ;  a 
favour  which  Pepin,  in  the  very  next  pontificate,  returned  in 
kind,  assisting  the  pope  to  usurp  the  imperial  dominions  in 
Italy  ;  or  that  pope  Stephen  and  king  Pepin  became  recipro- 
cally guarantees  of  each  other's  usurpations,  the  former  by 
the  sanction  of  religion,  the  latter  by  an  arn^ed  force.  As 
little  need  we  wonder  at  the  many  flagrant  injustices  of  other 
pontiffs,  when  they  happened  to  be  influenced  by  the  like 
motives. 

After  so  much  has  been  said  of  Gregory,  it  may  not  be 
amiss  to  make  some  remarks  on  his  character,  that  we  may 
not  be  thought  to  attribute  to  him  things  absolutely  incom- 
patible. To  me  be  appears  to  have  been  a  man,  whose 
understanding,  though  rather  above  the  middle  rate,  was 
much  warped  by  the  errours  and  prejudices  of  the  times 
wherein  he  lived.  His  piety  was  deeply  tinctured  with  super- 
stition, and  his  morals  with  monkery.  His  zeal  was  not  pure, 
in  respect  either  of  its  nature,  it  was  often  intolerant ;  witness 
the  sanguinary  measures  he  warmly  recommended  against  the 
Donatists  ;  and  in  respect  to  its  object,  it  is  manifest,  that  his 
attachment  was  more  to  the  form  than  to  the  power  of  reli- 
gion, to  the  name  than  to  the  thing.  His  aim  was  not  so 
much  to  turn  men  from  sin  to  God,  and  from  vice  to  virtue, 
as  to  bring  them  by  any  means  within  what  is  called  the  pale 
of  the  church,  and,  consequently,  under  the  dominion  of  its 
rulers;  to  draw  them  from  the  profession  of  paganism  to  the 
profession  of  Christianity.  If  this  was  effected,  he  cared  not, 
though  they  remained  more  than  half  heathen  still.  His  zeal 
was  exactly  that  of  those  pharisees,  who  compassed  sea  and 
land  to  make  a  proselyte,  which,  when  they  had  accomplished, 
they  rendered  him  twofold  more  a  child  of  hell  than  them- 
selves. Witness  the  advice  he  gave  to  the  monk  Augustine, 
who  had  been  sent  into  Britain  for  the  conversion  of  the 
Anglo-Saxons,  not  to  abolish  their  paganish  ceremonies,  but 
rather  to  adopt  them,  and  give  them  a  new  direction,  that  so 
the  conversion  of  the  people  might  be  facilitated,  and  their 
relapse  to  the  superstition  of  their  fathers  prevented.  The 
plain  language  of  this  conduct  is,  if  they  are  but  called  chris- 
tians, and  are  subjects  of  the  church,  to  which  they  yield  an 
external  conformity,  it  matters  not  what  sort  of  christians 
they  are  at  bottom,  or  how  much  of  the  pagan  they  may  still 
retain  in  their  heart,  principles,  and  conduct. 

I  must  own,  that  this  turn  of  thought  has  a  very  natural 
connexion  with  that  kind  of  zeal,  which  has  for  its  object  the 
erection,  or  preservation,  of  a  hierarchy,  or  what  is  called  an 
ecclesiastical  polity.     With  zealots  of  this  stamp,  a  bare  ex- 

I   i 


250  LECTURES  ON 

terior  will  serve  the  purpose.  Obedience,  whether  voluntary 
or  extorted ;  attachment,  whether  sincere  or  dissembled  ;  sub- 
mission, whether  it  proceed  from  love  or  from  fear,  equally, 
as  in  other  worldly  politicks,  tend  to  support  the  secular 
honours  and  emoluments  of  the  different  orders,  which  are 
the  great  pillars  of  the  fabrick.  >' 

This  kind  of  zeal  is,  in  like  manner,  the  true  source  of  per- 
secution for  conscience  sake,  and  of  a  maxim  inseparably 
connected  with  the  principle  of  intolerance,  that  the  end  will 
sanctify  the  means.  That  Gregory  had,  through  the  misfor- 
tune and  errour  of  the  times,  thoroughly  imbibed  both  these 
principles,  will  never  be  doubted  by  any  person,  who,  with 

judgment  and  impartiality,  reads  his  history.  Indeed,  in  the 
sacrifices  which  he  made,  as  appears  from  the  above  observa- 
tions, of  truth,  humanity,  and  integrity,  we  can  hardly,  at 
present,  though  the  maxim  were  admitted,  consider  the  end 
as  having  goodness  enough  to  justify  the  means.  His  object 
in  the  contest  with  the  Constantinopolitan  patriarch,  about  the 
title  of  universal  bishop,  was  not  the  advancement  of  Chris- 
tianity, or  so  much  as  the  profession  of  it,  it  was  not  the  en- 
largement of  the  pale  of  the  church,  or  the  increase  of  the 
number  of  her  nominal  children.  It  was  purely  the  honours 
and  pre-eminence  of  his  see.  But  such  was  the  infatuation  of 
the  times,  that  even  this  was  become,  in  their  imaginations, 
an  important  and  a  religious  object. 

Nor  was  this  the  case  only  with  the  see  of  Rome,  though  it 
was  evident  that  she  had  drank  most  deeply  of  this  spirit,  but 
in  some  measure,  of  every  particular  church.  It  was  become 
a  popular  and  plausible  cloak,  for  the  pride  and  ambition  of 
churchmen,  that  they  acted  out  of  a  principle  of  zeal  for  the 
dignity  of  the  see  with  which  they  were  intrusted,  that  is, 
said  they,  for  the  honour  of  the  founder.     This  was  thought 

^  to  be  of  great  weight,  if  the  founder  happened  to  be  a  saint  iti 
the  kalendar ;  of  greater  still,  if  he  was,  or  (which  is  all  one) 
if  he  was  believed  to  have  been,  a  scripture  saint,  or  an 
evangelist ;  and  greatest  of  all,  if  an  apostle.  They  acted  on 
the  supposition,  that  they  could  not  more  effectually  ingratiate 
themselves  with  their  patron,  though  in  heaven,  than  by  ex- 
alting the  church  he  had  erected  or  endowed  vtpon  the  earth, 
above  the  churches  erected  or  endowed  by  others,  and,  con- 
sequently, in  exalting  him  above  his  fellow  saints.  They,  in 
this  way,  were  disposed  to  excuse  their  interferences  with 
one  another,  thinking  it  reasonable,  that  each  should  do  his 
best  for  the  saint  to  whom  he  was  most  indebted,  and  who, 
from  being  the  founder,  commonly  became  the  tutelar  saint 
of  his  diocese,  or  parish.     And  then,  as  to  the  idea  they  sup~ 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  251 

posed  those  saints  to  entertain  of  the  dignity  of  their  respec- 
tive churches,  it  was  altogether  secular,  or  suited  to  the 
apprehensions  of  mere  men  of  the  world.  This  dignity  con- 
sisted not  at  all  in  the  virtue  and  piety  of  the  parishioners, 
but  in  the  opulence  and  pre-eminences  of  the  clergy,  in  the 
extent  and  populousness  of  the  parish  or  diocese,  the  magnifi- 
cence of  the  churches,  sacred  utensils,  and  vestments,  parti- 
cularly the  rjmk,  the  titles,  the  privileges,  the  prerogatives, 
and  the  riches  of  the  pastor. 

It  is  true,  the  apostles,  when  on  this  earth,  before  they  were 
fully  instructed  concerning  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  the 
spiritual  nature  of  the  Messiah's  government,  were  found 
contending  with  one  another  who  should  be  greatest.  And 
it  is  equally  true,  that  their  Lord  and  Master  severely  re- 
prehended this  conduct,  and  taught  them,  that  unless  they 
were  converted,  and  acquired  a  very  different  disposition, 
as  well  as  different  sentiments  concerning  true  greatness, 
far  from  being  great  in  that  kingdom,  they  should  never 
enter  it.  And  it  is  to  be  believed,  nay,  their  conduct  de- 
monstrates, that  they  were  soon  after  far  superiour  to  thoughts 
so  grovelling,  to  an  ambition  so  ill  adapted  to  their  profession. 
But  from  the  sentiments  which  gradually  sprang  up  in  the 
church,  on  the  decline  of  true  knowledge  and  genuine  piety, 
men  seemed  universally  to  be  convinced,  that  in  these  squab- 
bles for  greatness,  eminence,  and  precedency,  the  apostles  and 
saints  were  still  as  keenly  engaged  in  heaven  as  ever  thev  had 
been  on  the  earth  ;  and  that  they  could  not  be  more  highly 
gratified,  than  by  the  successful  struggles  of  their  clients 
here  in  maintaining  their  respective  honours  and  pre-emi- 
nences. 

Nor  does  any  person  seem  ever  to  have  entered  more  into 
these  views  than  the  celebrated  pope  Gregory.  He  was  ever 
holding  forth  the  prerogatives  of  St.  Peter,  (who  was,  in  his 
time,  acknowledged  as  the  founder  of  his  church)  nor  did  he 
make  any  ceremony  of  signifying,  that  this  prime  minister  of 
Jesus  Christ,  like  other  prime  ministers,  would  be  most  libe- 
ral of  his  favours  to  those  who  were  most  assiduous  in  making 
court  to  him,  especially  to  them  who  were  most  liberal  to  his 
foundation  at  Rome,  and  most  advanced  its  dignity  and 
power.  So  much  for  St.  Gregory,  and  for  the  nature  and 
extent  of  Roman  papal  virtue. 


252  LECTURES  ON 


LECTURE  XVIL 


An  the  preceding  lecture,  I  illustrated,  at  some  length,  in  the 
instance  of  Gregory,  one  of  the  best  of  the  Roman  pontiffs, 
how  far  the  maxim  could  go,  of  reckoning  every  thing  just  and 
lawful,  by  which  the  papal  power  could  be  advanced,  and  the 
supremacy  of  Rome  secured.  But  it  was  not  in  one  or  two 
ways  only,  that  they  showed  their  attention  to  the  aforesaid 
maxim,  but  in  every  way  wherein  they  could  apply  it  to  advan- 
tage. I  have  also  observed  to  you  some  of  their  other  prac- 
tices of  the  like  nature  and  tendency.  The  only  artifice  I 
shall  consider  at  present,  is  the  claims  which  Rome  so  long 
and  so  assiduously  affected  to  derive  from  the  prerogatives  of 
the  apostle  Peter,  the  pretended  founder  of  that  see.  1  have 
hinted  at  this,  by  the  way,  once  and  again  ;  but  as  it  was  one 
of  her  most  potent  engines,  it  will  deserve  our  special  at- 
tention. 

In  my  first  discourse,  on  the  rise  of  the  pontificate,  I  showed 
sufficiently  how  destitute  this  plea  is  of  every  thing  that  can 
deserve  the  name  of  evidence,  and  observed,  that  the  first 
pontiff  who  seemed  directly  to  found  the  honours  of  his  see 
on  the  privileges  of  Peter,  was  pope  Innocent,  about  the 
beginning  of  the  fifth  century.  As  to  the  apostolick  age,  and 
that  immediately  succeeding,  there  is  not  a  vestige  of  either 
authority  or  precedency  in  the  Roman  pastor,  more  than  in 
any  other  bishop  or  pastor  of  the  church.  Nor  is  this  to  be 
imputed  to  a  defect  of  evidence  through  the  injury  of  time, 
in  relation  to  the  point  in  question.  So  far  from  it,  that 
next  to  the  sacred  canon,  the  most  ancient  and  most  valuable 
monument  we  have  of  christian  antiquity,  is  a  very  long  letter 
to  the  Corinthians  from  a  bishop  of  Rome,  Clement,  who 
had  been  contemporary  with  the  apostles,  and  is  mentioned 
by  Paul,  in  one  of  his  epistles.     So  much  the  reverse  do  we 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  253 

find  here  of  every  thing  that  looks  like  authority  and  state, 
that  this  worthy  pastor,  in  the  true  spirit  of  primitive  and 
christian  humility,  sinks  his  own  name  entirely  in  that  of  the 
congregation  to  which  he  belonged,  and  does  not  desire  that  he 
should  be  considered  otherwise  than  as  any  other  individual 
of  the  society  ;  a  manner  very  unlike  that  of  his  successours, 
and  quite  incompatible  with  their  claims.  The  letter  is  titled 
and  directed  thus  :  "  The  church  of  God,  which  sojourns  at 
"  Rome,  to  the  church  of  God,  which  sojourns  at  Corinth." 
The  words  of  the  congregation  were  then  considered  as  of 
more  weight  than  those  of  any  bishop,  even  the  bishop  of 
Rome.  Nor 'is  there,  in  the  whole  performance,  any  trace  of 
authority  lodged  either  in  him,  or  in  his  church,  over  the 
church  of  Corinth,  or,  indeed,  over  any  person  or  community. 
In  every  part,  he  speaks  the  language  not  of  a  superiour  to  his 
inferiours,  a  master  to  his  servants,  or  even  a  father  to  his 
children,  but  of  equal  to  equal,  friend  to  friend,  and  brother 
to  brother.  He  uses  no  dictating  and  commanding  ;  he  only 
exhorts  and  entreats.  To  the  contraveners  there  are  no  menac- 
ing denunciations,  such  as  have,  for  many  centuries,  accom- 
panied the  papal  bull  of  the  vengeance  of  Almighty  God,  and 
the  malediction  of  the  blessed  apostles  Peter  and  Paul.  The 
modesty  of  the  style  of  this  truly  primitive  pastor,  is  an  infal- 
lible index  of  the  modesty  of  his  pretensions  ;  and,  let  me  add, 
a  very  strong  evidence  of  the  great  antiquity,  and  perfect  au- 
thenticity of  the  epistle. 

The  first  who  appeared  to  claim  any  thing  like  authority  was 
Victor,  bishop  of  Rome,  (or  pope,  if  you  please  to  call  him  so, 
though  that  name  was  not  then  peculiar)  who  lived  near  the 
end  of  the  second  century.  This  man,  the  first  noted  stickler 
for  uniformity,  quarrelled  with  the  Asiatick  bishops  for  fol- 
lowing a  different  rule  in  the  observance  of  Easter,  or  the  feast 
of  the  passover,  from  that  followed  in  the  west.  This  festival 
appears  from  the  beginning  to  have  been  distinguished  by 
christians,  not  on  its  own  account  as  a  Jewish  solemnity,  in 
commemoration  of  their  deliverance  from  Egypt,  but  on  ac^ 
count  of  its  coincidence  in  respect  of  time,  with  those  most 
memorable  of  all  events,  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Christ. 
In  the  east,  they  were  accustomed  to  observe  the  14th  day  of 
the  first  month,  on  whatever  day  of  the  week  it  h.^ipened.  In 
the  west,  when  the  14th  did  not  fall  on  Sunday,  they  kept 
it  the  first  Sunday  after.  When  Victor  found  that  the  orien- 
tals were  no  more  impelled  by  his  menaces  than  persuaded  bv 
his  arguments,  to  relinquish  the  custom  they  had  been  taught 
by  their  founders,  and  to  adopt  implicitly  the  Roman  practice, 
he,  in  a  rage,  cut  them  off  from  his  communion.     It  is  of  im- 


254  LECTURES  ON 

portance  here  to  observe,  that  this  phrase,  as  used  then,  was 
not  (as  it  is  often  misunderstood  by  modern  readers)  of  the 
same  import  with  excommunicating,  in  the  strictest  sense.  It 
only  denotes  refusing,  in  respect  of  one's  self,  to  join  with  such 
a  person  in  religious  exercises.  And  this  every  bishop  what- 
ever considered  himself  as  entitled  to  do^  in  regard  to  those 
whom  he  thought  to  err  in  essential  matters.  That  the  pope 
himself  considered  it  in  this  manner,  is  manifest  from  the 
pains  he  took  (though  to  no  purpose)  to  induce  other  bishops 
to  follow  his  example  ;  sensible,  that  his  refusal  of  communi- 
cating with  the  Quartodeciraans,  as  they  were  called,  did  nei- 
ther exclude  them  from  the  communion  of  the  church,  unless 
the  resolution  had  become  universal,  nor  oblige  any  other  bi- 
shop to  exclude  them,  till  satisfied  of  the  propriety  of  the  mea- 
sure. Accordingly,  he  is  not  considered  by  his  contempora- 
ries as  assuming  an  extraordinary  power,  but  as  using  very  ab- 
surdly and  uncharitably  a  power  which  every  one  of  them  had 
as  well  as  he.  Even  those  of  the  same  opinion  with  him,  in 
regard  to  Easter,  would  not  concur  in  this  measure.  They 
looked  on  the  time  of  observing  that  festival  as  merely  circum- 
stantial, and  therefore  not  a  sufficient  reason  for  a  breach. 
Such  had  been  the  opinion  of  his  own  predecessors,  and 
such  also  was  the  opinion  of  all  his  successours,  till  the  time 
of  Constantine,  when,  by  the  emperour's  influence  with  the 
Nicene  council,  the  practice  of  the  west  was  established 
throughout  the  church.  So  far,  therefore,  is  this  passage  of 
history,  as  some  have  represented  it,  from  being  an  evidence 
of  power  in  the  Roman  pastor  at  that  early  period,  that  it  is  a 
very  strong  evidence  of  the  contrary.  In  Victor,  we  have  a 
pope  that  was  wrong-headed  and  violent  enough  to  attempt  an 
extraordinary  exertion,  if  he  had  had  but  as  much  influence  as 
would  have  secured  to  his  endeavours  some  probability  of  suc- 
cess. But  in  any  other  way  than  that  of  example  and  persua- 
sion, he  knew  that  his  endeavours  could  only  serve  to  render 
himself  ridiculous.  Of  so  little  account,  however,  were  his 
judgment  and  example  made,  that,  in  this  step,  to  his  no  small 
mortification,  he  remained  singular.  All  were  ashamed  of  it, 
and  his  immediate  successour  did  not  judge  it  proper  to  adopt 
it.  I  need  not  add,  that  on  this  occasion  we  hear  not  a  sylla- 
ble of  the  auihority  of  St.  Peter,  or  of  any  right  in  the  Roman 
see,  to  direct  and  command  all  other  churches. 

Of  no  greater  consequence  was  the  excommunication  of  St. 
Cypi'ian,  and  most  of  the  African  bishops,  about  half  a  century 
afterwards,  by  pope  Stephen,  on  occasion  of  the  question  about 
the  validity  of  heretical  baptism.  These  sentences  were  mere 
brutafulmijiai  had  no  consequences,  and,  as  Augustin  observes, 
produced  no  schism.     The  pope's  excommunication,  whea  un- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  255 

supported  by  other  bishops,  did,  in  effect,  rebound  upon  him- 
self, and  he  himself  was  properly  the  only  person  cut  off  by 
such  a  sentence  from  the  full  communion  of  the  church.  No- 
thing can  be  j aster  than  the  sentiment  of  Firmilian  on  this  sub- 
ject. "  O  Stephen,"  says  he,  "  by  attempting  to  separate 
"  others  from  thee,  thou  hast  separated  thyself  from  all  other 
"  churches.  He  is  the  true  schismatick  who  departs,  as  thou 
"  hast  done,  from  the  unity  of  the  church."  When  the  bishop 
of  Rome  acted  unreasonably,  no  person  considered  himself  as 
under  an  obligation  to  follow  his  example  more  than  that  of 
any  other  pastor  in  the  church.  Nor  was  Stephen's  conduct, 
any  more  than  Victor's,  imitated  by  his  successour  j  for  though 
the  African  bishops  rebaptized,  and  most  others  did  not,  they 
lived  peaceably  in  communion  with  each  other  till  rebaptiza- 
tion  was  condemned  in  the  folloiviug  century,  fii'st  by  the  synod 
of  Aries,  and  then  by  the  council  of  Nice. 

Even  as  far  down  as  the  pontificate  of  Daraasus,  towards 
the  end  of  the  fourth  century,  when  the  see  of  Rome  was, 
through  the  munificence  of  the  emperours  and  persons  of  opu- 
lence, greatlj*  increased  in  riches  and  splendour,  and  conse- 
quently, in  dignity  and  power,  a  synod  of  Italian  bishops,  with 
the  pope  at  their  head,  in  a  letter  to  the  emperour  Gratian, 
thus  express  themselves  in  regard  to  the  superiority  of  the 
see  of  Rome  :  ''  The  bishop  of  Rome  is  above  other  bishops, 
."  in  respect  of  the  prerogatives  of  his  apostolick  see,  but  on  a 
"  level  with  them  in  respect  of  his  ministry."  Let  it  be  ob- 
served, that  the  terva  apofitotick  was  not  yet  peculiarly  appro- 
priated to  the  Roman  see,  but  was  conceived  to  belong  to  it, 
as  has  before  been  observed,  in  common  not  only  with  all  the 
churches  that  had  been  founded  by  apostles,  but  even  with 
all  patriarchal  and  metropolitical  churches.  By  his  superiority, 
therefore,  no  more  is  meant  than  such  a  precedency  as  they 
supposed  Peter  to  have  enjoyed  amongst  his  fellow-apostles. 
As  to  the  latter  part  of  the  declaration,  the  equality  of  the 
ministry  in  the  bishops,  though  it  be  the  doctrine  of  all  anti- 
quity, nothing  can  be  more  repugnant,  to  what  has  been  the 
doctrine  of  Rome,  for  many  centuries,  namely,  that  all  power, 
both  spiritual  and  temporal,  is  lodged  in  the  pope  ;  that  all  the 
bishops  are  no  more  than  his  deputies  ;  that  all  the  authority 
and  jurisdiction  they  are  vested  with,  are  but  emanations 
from  the  plenitude  of  power  lodged  in  him.  But  Damasus, 
who,  though  far  from  being  unambitious,  had  not  formed  a 
conception  of  so  exorbitant  a  claim,  appears  to  have  been  well 
satisfied  with  the  respect  shown  to  his  see  in  the  above  de- 
claration. 


256  LECTURES  ON 

From  this  event,  to  the  time  of  Innocent,  in  the  beginning 
of  the  fifth  century,  though  the  popes  piqued  themselves  not 
-a  little  on  the  tradition  they  had,  however  implausible,  that 
their  see  was  founded  by  the  apostle  Peter,  they  did  not  pre- 
tend to  derive  any  peculiar  authority  from  him  ;  but  in  main- 
taining their  power,  always  recurred  to  the  dignity  of  Rome, 
the  queen  of  cities,  the  capital  of  the  world,  to  the  imperial 
rescripts,  the  decrees  of  Sardica,  which,  on  some  occasions, 
they  wanted  to  impose  on  mankind  for  the  decrees  of  Nice, 
and  to  canons,  real  or  superstitious,  of  ecumenical  councils. 
That  there  were  real  canons,  which  gave  the  bishop  of  Rome 
a  precedency  before  other  bishops,  is  not  denied  ;  but  in  these 
it  is  never  assigned  as  a  reason,  that  this  church  had  Peter  fo^! 
its  founder,  but  solely,  that  the  city  was  the  world's  metropolis. 

But  no  sooner  was  this  other  foundation  suggested,  than  its 
utility  for  the  advancement  of  the  papal  interest  was  perceived 
by  every  bod}'.  First,  this  was  a  more  popular  plea.  It  made 
the  papal  authority  much  more  sacred,  as  being  he-ld  directly 
jtire  divino^  whereas,  on  the  other  plea,  it  was  held  merely  jWe 
hwnano.  Secondly,  this  rendered  that  authority  immovable. 
What  one  emperour  gave  by  his  rescript,  another  might  resume 
in  the  same  manner ;  the  canons  of  one  council  might  be  re- 
pealed by  a  posterior  council.  Such  alterations,  in  matters 
of  discipline,  arrangement,  and  subordination,  had  been  often 
made.  But  who  durst  abrogate  the  prerogatives  granted  by 
his  Lord  and  Master  to  the  prince  of  the  apostles,  and  by  hirri 
transmitted  to  his  church  ?  Thirdly,  the  power  claimed  in  this 
way  was  more  indefinite,  and  might  be  extended,  nobody 
knows  how  far,  as  long  as  there  was  found  enough  of  ignorance 
and  superstition  in  the  people  to  favour  the  attempts  of  the 
priesthood.  Besides,  when  the  claim  was  of  divine  right,  the 
pontiff  had  this  advantage,  that  he  alone  was  considered  as  the 
proper  interpreter  of  his  own  privileges.  The  case  was  totally 
different  with  all  human  decrees,  authority,  and  claims  what- 
ever. Add  to  this,  that  whilst  they  derived  from  any  terres- 
trial power,  they  could  never  raise  their  claims  above  the 
authority  which  was  acknowledged  to  be  the  source.  But 
when  the  source  was  believed  to  be  in  heaven,  no  claim  over 
earthly  powers,  however  arrogant,  could  endanger  their  exceed- 
ing in  this  respect.  And  though  I  believe,  that  all  these  con- 
side;-ations  were  not  fully  in  view  at  the  beginning,  yet  it  is 
certain,  that  for  these  purposes  they  employed  this  topick,  in 
the  course  of  a  few  centuries,  when  they  would  have  all  power, 
secular  as  well  as  spiritual,  to  have  been  conferred  by  Peter,  a 
poor  fisherman  of  Galilee,  upon  the  pope. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  kSf 

it  was  some  time,  however,  before  the  old  ground  of  canons^ 
imperial  edicts,  and  ancient  custom,  was  entirely  deserted, 
Xozimus,  the  successour  of  Innocent,  and  a  most  aspiring  pon- 
tiff, recurred  to  these  as  the  sole  foundation  of  his  pretended 
right  of  judging  in  the  last  resort.  It  was,  perhaps,  prudent, 
not  to  desert  a  plea  at  once  which  had  great  weight  with  many, 
and  to  risk  all  upon  a  novelty,  which,  till  men's  ears  were  fami- 
liarized with  it,  might,  for  aughc  he  knew,  be  but  little  regard- 
ed. In  process  of  time*,  however,  the  credulity  of  the  people 
keeping  pace  with  their  degeneracy  in  knowledge,  and  virtue^ 
and  rational  religion,  dispelled  all  apprehensions  on  this  head, 
and  the  repeal  or  the  canons  of  Sardica  by  other  councils,  com- 
pelled his  holiness  to  recur  to  the  new  ground  pointed  out  by 
Innocent,  which  was  found,  upon  trial,  to  afford  a  much  firmer 
bottom,  whereon  to  erect  the  wonderful  fabrick  of  the  hier- 
archy. 

Accordingly,  in  less  than  fifty  years  after  this  plea  had  beeii 
ushered  in  by  Innocent,  it  began  to  be  a  common  topick  with 
the  pontiffs,  and  all  the  advocates  of  pontifical  jurisdiction. 
Hilarius,  in  the  first  letter  he  wrote  after  his  accession  to  the 
papal  chair,  mentions,  with  much  exultation,  the  primacy  of 
St.  Peter,  and  the  dignity  of  his  ste.  There  was  the  greater 
need  of  this  alteration,  as  Rome  was,  both  in  riches  and  splen- 
dour, daily  declining,  and,  from  being  the  imperial  city,  was 
become  only  the  capital  of  Italy,  a  Gothick  kingdom,  as  Con- 
stantinople was,  in  strictness,  the  only  imperial  city,  and  was 
now  become  much  superiour  to  the  other  in  pdpulousness  and 
wealth.  Accordingly,  in  the  time  of  pope  Gelasius,  about  the 
close  of  the  fifth  century,  in  a  synod,  consisting  mostlv  of 
Italian  bishops,  and  dependents  on  the  pontiff,  a  decree  was 
obtained,  declaring  boldly,  (as  if,  says  Bower,  all  records  had 
beim  destroyed,  and  men  knew  nothing  of  what  had  happened 
but  a  few  years  before)  "  that  it  was  not  to  any  councils,  or  the 
**  decrees  of  any,  that  the  holy  roman  catholick  and  apostolick 
*'  church  owed  her  primacy,  but  to  the  words  of  our  Saviour, 
"  saying,  in  the  gospel,  *  Thou  art  Peter^  &c.'  and  thereby 
*'  building  the  church  upon  him,  as  on  a  rock  which  nothing 
*'  could  shake  ;  that  the  Roman  church  not  having  spot  or 
**  wrinkle,  was  consecrated  and  exalted  above  all  other 
**  churches,  by  the  presence  as  well  as  by  the  death,  martyr- 
**  dom,  and  glorious  triumph  of  the  two  chief  apostles,  St. 
"  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  who  suffered  at  Rome  under  Nero,  not 
"  at  different  times,  as  the  hereticks  say,  but  at  the  same  time, 
*'  and  on  the  same  day  ;  and  that  the  Roman  church  is  the  first 
*'  church,  being  founded  by  the  first  apostle,  the  church  of 
"  Alexandria  the  second,  being  founded  by  his  disciple,  St4, 

K  k  . 


25^  LECTURES  ON 

'^  Mark,  in  his  tiame,  and  that  of  Antioch  the  third,  because 
^  St.  Peter  dwelt  there  before  he  came  to  Rome,  and  in  that 
"  city  the  faithful  were  first  distinguished  by  the  name  of 
*'  christians." 

Why  was  there  no  mention  here,  I  must  beg  leave  to  ask,  of 
the  church  of  Jerusalem,  which  had  been  infinitely  more  highly 
honoured,  even  in  their  own  way  of  estimating  honours,  than 
any  or  all  of  those  churches  put  together  ?  It  had  been  honour- 
ed by  the  presence,  the  ministry,  the  martyrdom,  the  resurrec- 
tion, and  glorious  triumph  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  sole 
founder  and  king  of  the  church  universal,  honoured  by  the 
descent  of  the  Ifoly  Ghost,  on  the  whole  college  of  apostles, 
whereby  they  were  both  authorized  and  qualified  to  commence 
their  ministry,  honoured  further  by  the  express  command  of 
Jesus  Christ  to  all  his  apostles,  to  begin  the  discharge  of  their 
office  at  Jerusalem. 

But,  says  the  Romanist,  it  was  for  this  very  reason,  the 
murder  of  the  Lord  of  glory,  that  the  Jews  were  rejected  from 
being  God's  people,  and  Jerusalem  in  particular  humbled,  in 
being  denied  the  honours  she  had  otherwise  enjoyed,  as  the 
Capital  of  the  church  of  Christ.  Is  it  then  reasonable,  that 
Jerusalem  should  be  punished  for  the  death  of  the  master,  and 
Rome  rewarded  and  honoured  for  the  slaughter  of  his  ser*- 
vants  ?  Shall  that  be  pleaded  as  a  merit  to  the  one,  which  iS 
accounted  a  dishonour  to  the  other  ?  And  if  not  the  guilt  of 
the  murderers,  but  the  testimony  given  to  the  truth  by  the 
sufferers,  and  the  importance  of  the  oblation,  are  the  things  td 
be  considered,  the  martyrdom  of  Jesus  Christ  was  infinitely 
more  important,  in  respect  both  of  the  victim,  and  of  the  con- 
sequences, than  that  of  all  his  apostles  and  followers  put  toge- 
ther. It  is  true,  the  infidel  Jews  were  rejected  as  a  nation, 
because  they  had  previously  rejected  the  Lord's  Messiah,  and, 
in  this  fate,  the  unbelieving  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  justly 
shared,  when  their  temple  and  polity  were  destroyed  ;  but  this 
was  no  reason  why  the  church  of  Jerusalem,  that  is,  the  be- 
lieving inhabitants  and  believing  Jews,  a  church  which  Christ 
himself  had  planted,  and  which  was,  for  some  time,  watered 
by  the  joint  labours  of  all  his  apostles,  should  be  involved  in 
that  punishment.  On  the  contrary,  their  faith,  their  fortitude, 
their  glory,  are  enhanced  by  the  unbelief,  apostacy,  and  unre- 
lenting cruelty  of  their  countrymen  and  fellow-citizens.  And 
that  our  Lord  himself  meant  to  show  a  particular  respect  to 
his  faithful  servants  or  church  in  that  city,  is  manifest  fronn, 
what  has  been  observed,  the  order  he  gave  to  his  disciples,  to 
wait  there  the  fulfilment  of  the  Father's  promise,  the  effusion 
of  the  spirit  in  a  variety  of  miraculous  gifts,  after  which  they 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  ^5^ 

were  there  to  begin  their  ministry.     For  out  of  Zion  this  new^ 
law  was  to  issue,  and  the  word  of  the  Lord  from  Jerusalem. 

I  adduce  all  this  more  as  an  argumerUum  ad  hominem  to  the 
papist,  than  as  implying,  that  it  was  intended  that  one  church 
ought  to  have  jurisdiction  over  another,  by  whomsoever  found- 
ed. The  disciples  were  commanded  to  call  no  man  father 
upon  the  earth,  because  they  had  only  one  Father,  who  is  in 
heaven,  and  they  themselves  were  all  brethren  ;  and  to  call 
no  one  master,  teacher,  or  guide  ;  because  Christ  alone  was 
their  master,  their  teacher,  their  guide.  It  is  scarcely  worth 
while  to  criticise  minutely  this  decree  of  Gelasius.  It  founds 
their  whole  claim  on  a  tradition,  which  has  been  shown  to  be 
not  only  uncertain,  but  exceedingly  improbable.  It  is  some- 
what remarkable,  that  he  takes  just  as  much  of  tradition  as. 
will  suit  his  purpose,  and  no  more.  The  tradition  was  as 
universal,  and  much  more  probable,  that  Peter  was  likewise 
the  founder  of  Antioch  ;  but  this  he  did  not  judge  convenient 
to  admit.  Besides,  that  Mark  founded  Alexandria  in  Peter's 
name,  had  never  been  heard  of  in  the  church  before.  In  this 
pitiful  manner  he  was  obliged  to  mutilate  and  misrepresent 
tradition,  that  by  all  means  he  might  avoid  letting  it  appear^ 
that  the  dignity  of  those  several  cities  in  the  empire,  and  that 
alone,  had  determined  the  rank  of  their  respective  bishops. 
With  a  gross  and  ignorant  people,  such  as  the  Romans  were 
now  become,  bold  assertions  would  supply  the  place  both  of 
arguments  and  of  testimonies.  The  pope  had  also  this  further 
motive  in  this  new  conceit,  to  mortify,  as  much  as  possible, 
the  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  (the  only  prelate  powerful 
enough  to  be  a  rival)  by  exalting  the  bishops  of  Alexandria 
and  Antioch  above  him  ;  and,  doubtless,  by  this  expedient,  he 
hoped  the  more  easily  to  gain  the  two  last  mentioned  bishops 
to  his  side. 

Nothing  from  this  time  forwards  was  heard  from  the  patro- 
nisers  of  Romish  usurpation  but  Thou  art  Peter^  and  I  give 
to  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven^  and  so  forth.  These 
things  began  now  to  be  echoed  from  every  quartei".  What  is 
often  repeated,  how  weak  soever,  never  fails  to  make  some 
impression,  especially  on  the  illiterate.  The  hard  stone  is  at 
length  hollowed  by  the  eave's  drop,  however  feeble  and  unper- 
ceivable  the  effect  of  a  single  drop  must  be  accounted. 

Matters  were  advanced  so  far  at  the  beginning  of  the  sixth 
century,  that  when  pope  Symmachus  was  summoned  to  ap^ 
pear  before  an  assembly  of  bishops,  and  undergo  a  trial  for 
■several  crimes  of  which  he  was  accused,  it  was  pleaded  by 
some,  (for  the  first  time,  indeed)  that  no  synod,  or  council 
h«l.d  a  right  to  judge  the  pope,  that  he  was  accountable  for  hjs 
actions  to  God  alone.     It  must  be  owned,  that  this  iiici">;i^ 


26Q  LECTURES  ON 

though  at  present  like  an  article  of  faith  with  every  genuine 
son  of  Rome,  (I  mean  not  every  Roman  catholick]  appeared 
to  the  generality  of  christims,  at  the  time  it  was  broached,  ex- 
ceedingly extravagant  and  absurd.  But  the  synod  (for  it  was 
not  a  general  council)  which  Theodorick,  king  of  the  Goths, 
had  convened,  consisting  entirely  of  Italian  bishops,  who  were, 
in  several  respects,  dependant,  and  had  now,  of  a  long  time, 
considered  the  exaltation  of  the  Roman  see  as  the  exaltation 
of  their  country,  and  the  only  means  left  of  raising  themselves 
above  the  eastern  part  of  the  empire  ;  though  they  were  not 
inclinable  to  give  a  positive  decision  in  this  extraordinary 
question,  were  satisfied  to  supersede  the  necessity  of  deciding 
it,  by  absolving  the  pontiff  from  all  the  charges  brought  against 
him,  and  restoring  him  to  all  his  authority  both  within  and 
■without  the  city. 

It  was  impossible  to  foresee  how  far  the  advocates  for  the 
hierarchy  would  carry  the  privileges  they  derived  from  the 
prince  of  the  apostles,  as  they  commonly  affected  to  style  St. 
Peter.  What  shall  we  think  of  this  high  prerogative,  the  ti- 
tle, the  absolute  jus  divinum,  to  commit  all  crimes  with  im- 
punity, at  least  in  this  world,  being  amenable  to  no  jurisdic-. 
tion,  temporal  or  spiritual  ?  Yet  nothing  less  than  this  was  the 
pope's  benefit  of  clergy  !  Some,  to  avoid  one  absurdity  in  giv- 
ing an  unbounded  licence,  have  run  into  another,  maintaining; 
the  impeccability  of  popes  in  action,  as  well  as  their  infallibi- 
lity in  judgment.  But  let  any  man  who  has  read  their  history, 
even  as  written  by  their  own  friends  and  favourers,  believe 
them  to  be  either  impeccable,  or  infallible,  if  he  can.  I  shall 
only  remark,  by  the  way,  that,  in  an  Italian  synod,  assembled 
little  more  than  a  century  before  the  pontificate  of  Symma- 
chus,  the  bishops,  however  partial  to  the  pope,  were  so  far 
from  exempting  him  from  the  jurisdiction  of  a  council,  that 
they  presented  a  petition  to  the  emperour  Gratian,  begging  it, 
as  a  special  favour,  that  the  bishop  of  Rome  might  not  be 
judged  by  a  subordinate  magistrate,  but  either  by  the  emper- 
our himself,  or  by  a  council.  And  to  obtain  so  much  as  this 
was  then  thought  a  very  great  acquisition,  though  now  it  would 
be  accounted  extremely  derogatory  to  the  holy  see. 

The  progrtss  of  the  pontiffs  was  indeed  rapid.  One  attain, 
ment,  though,  at  the  time  it  was  made,  it  appeared  the  ut- 
most extent  of  their  ambition,  alwavs  served  but  as  a  step  to 
facilitate  the  acquisition  of  something  still  higher.  ''  A  per- 
"  son  never  mounts  so  high,"  said  Cromwell,  "  as  when  he 
*'  does  not  know  himself  how  far  he  desires  to  go."  Nothing 
is  more  certain  than  that,  in  later  centuries,  there  were  many 
prerogHtlves  strenuously  contended  for  by  ihe  papal  see,  which 
the  popes  of  earlier  ages  explicitly  disclaimed. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  261 

But  to  return  to  the  new  plea,  in  support  of  the  hierarchy, 
first  suggested  by  Innocent,  and  afterwards  solemnly  ratified 
in  a  synod  by  Gclasius,  there  was  even  a  gradation  in  the  use 
they  made  of  this,  and  in  the  consequences  they  deduced 
from  it.  At  first,  it  was  litde  more  than  a  sort  of  divine  title, 
in  the  see  of  Kome,  to  that  honour  and  precedencv ,  whicK 
she  had  for  several  ages  enjoyed  by  such  a  human  title  as  I 
have  formerly  explained.  The  altering  of  their  ground,  ihere-^ 
fore,  seems  not  at  first  to  have  been  so  much  intended  for  ei^; 
tending  their  prerogatives,  as  for  rendering  them  more  vene- 
rable, and  more  unassailable,  by  every  human  power.  But 
matters  did  not  long  rest  here. 

For  some  ages  the  primacy  of  Peter  was  understood  by  no- 
body to  imply  more  than  that  he  was  a  president,  chairman, 
or  first  in  rank,  in  the  apostolick  college.  But  now  that  his 
prerogatives  were  considered  as  the  ground-work  of  the  Ro- 
man claims,  every  true  Romanist  was  disposed  to  stretch 
them  as  much  as  possible.  The  primacy  they  first  raised  into 
a  superintendency,  then  the  superintendency  into  a  suprema- 
cy ;  and  the  supremacy  they  at  length  exalted  into  despotism, 
or  an  absolute  and  uncontroulable  jurisdiction.  Again,  what 
Wa.s  granted  to  Peter,  by  hi^  master,  was  no  longer  consider- 
ed in  the  way  it  had  been  formerly,  as  a  personal  reward  for 
the  important  confession  he  was  the  first  to  make.  Every 
prerogative,  which  they  fancied  to  have  belonged  to  him,  they 
now  ascribed  to  the  pope,  as  the  representative  of  his  person, 
and  the  inheritor  of  all  that  was  his.  What  a  wonderful  de- 
duction from  a  number  of  premises,  every  one  of  them  as- 
fetimed  without  proof,  and  some  of  them  in  direct  opposition 
to  the  clearest  evidence. 

As  their  claims  advanced,  their  style  varied.  In  the  pri- 
mitive ages,  ;he  utmost  that  was  pretended,  was,  that  the 
church,  or  christian  society  in  Rome,  was  founded  by  the 
apostle  Peter ;  that  is,  in  other  words,  that  the  first  converts 
to  Christianity,  in  Rome,  were  made  by  his  preaching  and 
ministry.  But  not  satisfied  with  what  is  implied  in  this  ac- 
count, that  he  was  the  first  who  preached  the  gospel  to  them, 
they  qifterwards  would  have  that  capital  to  be  the  peculiar  see 
of  St.  Peter,  where  he  was  settled  as  the  bishop,  or  fixed  pas- 
tor, of  the  congregation.  The  Romans  were  denominated 
the  peculiar  peoj.ie  of  St.  Peter.  The  pontiff  was  become  his 
successour  in  office.  Nay,  as  if  this  were  not  enough,  they 
quickly  affected  to  talk  of  Peter  as  still  personally  present 
there,  and  of  the  pope  as  the  organ  through  which  he  spoke. 
Their  episcopal  throne  is  arcordingly  the  chair  ol  St.  Peter* 
What  is  given  to  thai  church  is  given  to  St.  Peter.  To  dis- 
obey the  pope  is  to  affront  St.  Peter  ;  nay,  it  is  to  rebel  against 


262  LECTURES  ON 

God,  and  to  renounce  his  son  Jesus  Christ,  and  is  therefore 
no  better  than  total  apostacy.  This  was  now  become  their 
manner  universally. 

Nay,  so  far  did  pope  Stephen  the  second,  about  the  middle 
of  the  eighth  century,  carry  this  matter,  that  in  writing  to 
Pepin,  king  of  France,  on  a  very  urgent  occasion,  he  thought 
proper  to  use  the  apostle's  name  instead  of  his  own,  and  thus 
begins  his  letter :  *'  Simon  Peter,  the  servant  and  apostle  of 
**■  Jesus  Christ,  to  three  most  excellent  kings,  Pepin,  Charles, 
*'  and  Carioman,  to  all  the  holy  bishops,  abbots,  &c.  to  all 
**•  the  dukes,  counts,  and  captains  of  the  army,  and  to  the 
*'  whole  people  of  France,  grace  to  you  and  peace  be  multi- 
*'  plied.  I  am  the  apostle  Peter,  to  whom  it  was  said,  Thou 
*'  art  Peter^  and  upon  this  rock  will  I  build  my  churchy  and  the 
'-''  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it.^  And  to  thee  will  I 
*'  give  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ;  and  whatsoever  thou 
*'  shalt  bind  on  earthy  shall  be  bound  in  heaven^  ajid  -whatsoever 
*'  thou  shalt  loose  on  earthy  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven.  Feed  my 
'*  sheep.  As  all  this  was  said  to  me  peculiarly,  all  who  hear- 
**  ken  to  me,  and  obey  my  exhortations,  may  be  certain  that 
"  their  sins  are  forgiven,  and  that  they  will  be  admitted  into 
"  everlasting  life,  cleansed  from  all  guilt,  &c."  He  proceeds  to 
enjoin  them  to  assist  the  pope,  his  vicar,  and  the  Romans, 
his  favourite  people,  his  chosen  flock,  by  making  war  upon 
the  Lombards,  those  ravening  wolves,  as  they  would  hope  for 
remission  here,  or  admission  into  heaven  hereafter  ;  and  as- 
sures them,  that  in  this  entreaty  and  command,  he  is  joined 
by  our  lady,  the  virgin  Marv,  the  mother  of  God,  the  thrones 
and  dominions,  the  principalities  and  powers,  and  the  whole 
multitude  of  the  heavenly  host.  Now  this,  on  pope  Stephen's 
authority,  you  may  call  the  third  epistle  of  Peter.  But  on 
comparing  it  with  the  former  two,  we  cannot  help  remarking 
the  wonderful  change  in  the  apostle's  style.  In  this  he  is  a, 
perfect  braggart ;  whereas  in  those  we  find  not  a  syllable  of 
his  high  prerogatives  and  claims.  So  far  was  he  then  from 
assuming  any  superiority,  that  he  put  himself  on  a  level  not 
only  with  apostles,  but  with  every  minister  of  the  word.  The 
e/f/fr*  (says  he.  Pet.  v.  1,)  that  are  amongst  you ^  lexhort^  who 
am  also  an  elder.  The  Greek  words  are  more  emphatically 
expressive  of  equality  than  the  English,  Trpio-^vls^airin  a  uf^iv  ttx^m' 
kccXm  0  (rvf^yr^ir^vls^K^.  The  ''  presbyters  amongst  you,"  he  says  not 
I  their  archpresbyter  command,  but  "  I  their  fellow-presbyter 
exhort."  And  to  what  does  he  exhort  them  ?  "  To  feed  the 
"  flock  of  God,  which  was  among  them,  acting  the  parts  of 
"  bishops  or  overseers,  not  of  lords  over  God's  heritage,  but 
'*  serving  as  patterns  to  the  flock,  teacliing  them  not  so  much 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  ^g 

"b)^  precept  as  by  example."  Was  it  not,  however,  as  under 
shepherds,  that  ihev  were  to  feed  and  guide  the  christian  com- 
munity ?  Undoubtedly.  Who  then  was  the  chief  shepherd  ? 
This  also  we  learn  from  his  words.  It  was  not  Peter  himself. 
He  is  very  far  from  giving  such  a  suggestion.  But  it  was  Je- 
sus Christ,  his  and  their  common  master.  "  When  the  chief 
**  shepherd,  i  eipx,i^eifM)*,  shall  appear,  you  shall  receive  a  crown 
**  of  glory  that  tadeth  not  away."  Nothing  here  of  that  arro- 
gant and  imperious  style,  which  his  pretended  successours  so 
soon  assumed,  and  so  injuriously  fathered  upon  him.  In  re- 
gard to  the  spirit  of  the  epistles,  1  say  not  how  dillerent,  but 
how  opposite,  are  they  !  1  his,  transmitted  by  pope  Stephen, 
is  an  incentive,  by  every  means,  the  grossest  flattery  not  ex- 
cepted, to  war,  bloodshed,  and  vengeance.  Those  we  have 
in  the  sacred  canon,  breathe  nothing  but  humility,  peace,  and 
love,  a  meek  and  patient  submission  to  the  worst  evils  that 
men  could  inflict.  In  regard  to  the  new  fangled  titles  confer- 
red on  Mary,  of  our  lady^  and  the  mother  of  God,  so  foreign 
from  the  simple  manner  of  the  inspired  penmen,  I  suppose  a 
Romanist  would  account  for  them  by  saying,  that  the  apostifc 
must  have  learnt  these  improvements  on  his  language  from  St. 
Cyril,  who  had,  long  ere  now,  carried  to  heaven  the  news  of 
the  Nestorian  controversy,  and  his  own  triumph  at  the  coun- 
cil of  Ephesus. 

To  give  yoa  a  specimen  of  the  mode  of  proving  which  now 
xame  in  vogue.  The  pope  is  the  sole  foundation  of  the  chris- 
tian edifice  ;  for  Christ  said  to  Peter,  On  this  rock  I  will  build 
my  church.  In  other  places,  hoAVcA'er,  all  the  apostles  are  re- 
presented equally  as  foundations.  Again,  the  pope  alone  has 
the  whole  jurisdiction ;  for  Christ  said  to  Peter,  To  thee  ■will 
I  give  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  -whatsoever  thou 
srhalt  bind  on  earth,  shall  be  bound  in  heaven.  Yet  the  same 
power  is,  almost  in  the  same  words,  in  another  passage  giveu 
to  all  the  apostles,  nay,  and  to  the  whole  church.  The  pope  is 
the  chief  shepherd,  the  only  apostle  and  pastor,  that  derives  his 
power  from  Christ :  all  other  bishops  are  under  shepherds 
that  derive  their  power  from  the  pope.  And  how  is  this  evinced? 
Alter  the  shameful  full  of  Peter  in  thrice  denying  his  master,  Je- 
sus Christ  judged  it  meet  to  bring  him  thrice  solemnly  to  profess 
his  love,  and  subjoined  this  precept,  as  aff^ording  the  apostle 
the  means  of  giving  the  only  satisfactory  evidence  of  the  truth 
of  his  profession  :  Feed  my  sheep,  and  feed  ray  lambs.  Hence 
the  Romanist  sagely  concludes,  that  this  charge  belonged  only 
to  Peter.  He  might  with  equal  reason  have  maintained,  that 
as  the  question,  Lovest  thou  me  ^  was  put  only  to  Peter,  and 
the  threefold  profession  required  of  none,  and  given  by  none 
but  him,  it  was  not  a  duty  incumbent  on  the  other  apostles,  to 
love  their  master,  or  to  confess  him.     It  is  on  this  ground  , 


264  |.]|eTURES  OI^ 

also,  that  some  have  dared  to  advance,  in  contradiction  equat-* 
ly  to  the  sense  and  to  the  words  of  scripture,  that  Peter  was 
proper!,  the  only  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  that  all  the  rest 
were  the  apostles  of  Peter.  Seriously  to  refute  such  a  princi- 
ple would  be  almost  as  absurd  as  to  maintain  it. 

Nay,  to  show  a  little  more  of  their  wonderful  dexterity  in 
reasoning,  and  the  surprising  advantages  they  derive  from 
this  fund  of  St.  Peter,  the  pope's  infallibility  is  thus  demon- 
strated by  them.  Our  Lord  said  to  Peter,  before  the  denial, 
as  being  the  only  disciple  who  was  in  imminent  danger,  (for 
the  traitor  is  out  of  the  question)  SimoUy  Simon^  Satan  hath 
desired  to  have  you^  that  he  may  sift  you  as  wheat ;  hut  I  have 
prayed  for  thee^  that  thy  faith  fail  not ;  and  xvhen  thou  art  con' 
verted^  strengthen  thy  brethren^  Those  who  think  it  necessary 
to  mind  the  scope  of  the  place,  and  the  principles  of  reason, 
allege,  that  the  prayer  that  his  faith  might  not  fail,  means  evi* 
dently  that  he  might  not  proceed  so  far  as  to  make  a  total  de- 
fection from  Christianity,  which  he  would  soon,  by  repeatedly" 
abjuring  his  master,  appear  on  the  brink  of  doing.  But  who 
thinks  it  necessary  to  mind  these  in  disputing  ?  The  import  of 
this  passage,  says  the  Romanist,  is,  Christ  prayed  that  Peter 
might  have  the  gift  of  infallibility,  or,  as  they  also  term  it, 
inerrability,  in  his  judgment  concerning  all  articles  of  chris-*, 
tian  doctrine.  Peter  then  alone  was,  and  consequently  the 
pope,  his  sole  heir  and  representative,  alone  is,  infallible. 

I  shall  give  but  one  other  specimen  of  this  Romish  logick. 
When  in  the  ages  of  the  church,  posterior  to  those  I  have  yet 
remarked  on,  the  popes  claimed  to  be  the  true  depositaries  of 
all  secular  as  well  as  spiritual  jurisdiction,  how  satisfactory 
was  the  proof  they  produced  in  support  of  their  claim,  from 
this  passage.  They  said^  Lord^  behold  here  are  two  swords. 
And  he  said.  It  is  enough.  Here  they  shrewdly  ask,  Why 
were  there  neither  more  nor  fewer  than  two  swords  ?  The  an- 
swer is  plain  :  It  was  to  denote  that  there  were  two  sorts  of 
power,  neither  more  nor  fewer,  deposited  with  the  church,  the 
temporal  and  the  spiritual ;  and  that  these  two  were  sufficient 
for  all  her  occasions.  But  why  are  these  supposed  to  be  in- 
trusted solely  to  the  pope  ?  If  they  were  intrusted  to  Peter, 
they  are  certainly  intrusted  to  the  pope.  And  that  they  were 
intrusted  to  Peter  is  manifest  from  this,  that  Peter  afterwards 
used  one  of  them,  as  we  learn  from  the  evangelist  John,  in 
cutting  off  the  right  ear  of  Malchus,  a  servant  of  the  high 
priest.  And  if  he  had  one  of  these  swords,  what  good  rea- 
son can  be  given  why  he  should  not  have  both  ?  Thus,  by  a 
regular  deduction,  as  convincing  to  a  Romanist  as  demon- 
stration, it  is  proved,  that  the  pope  is  the  only  fountain  of  all 
authority,  both  temporal  and  spiritual. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  ^03? 


LECTURE  XVIIL 


tiriTiiimiininimmi 


X  N  my  preceding  lectures,  on  the  rise  and  progress  of  thfe 
papacy,  I  have  been  more  particular,  and  treated  things  more 
in  detail,  than  I  had  at  first  intended.  But  on  so  complex  a 
subject,  to  which  so  great  a  variety  of  different  and  even  dis* 
similar  circumstances  contributed,  it  is  not  easy  to  consult  at 
once  brevity  and  perspicuity.  Besides,  in  this  deduction,  I 
have  found  it  impossible  to  elucidate  the  latent  causes,  which 
eo-operated  in  rearing  this  wonderful  fabrick,  in  a  narrative 
of  its  advancement,  according  to  the  order  of  time.  To  have 
attempted  this  would  have  led  me  to  make  an  abridgment  of 
ecclesiastick  history,  and  to  interweave  with  it  such  critical 
inquiries,  as  would  serve  to  expose  the  secret  springs  and  pro* 
gress  of  that  enormous  power.  But  this  would  have  occa* 
sioned  a  still  more  minute  detail,  and  would,  after  all,  have 
scarcely  been  so  satisfactory  as  the  manner  I  have  adopted.  A 
number  of  different  springs,  in  the  great  machine,  which  ope- 
rated separately,  though  simultaneously,  I  have  been  obliged^ 
for  the  sake  of  distinctness,  to  consider  separately.  In  the 
deductions  I  have  given  of  each,  I  have  conformed  myself, 
as  much  as  possible,  to  the  order  of  time,  that  the  different 
phases,  if  I  may  so  express  myself,  of  the  same  plea,  at  dif* 
ferent  periods,  might  be  considered  and  compared.  Some- 
thing of  this  kind  you  may  have  observed  from  what  has  been 
said  on  the  subject  of  appeals,  and  on  the  different  founda^ 
tions  on  which  Rome,  at  different  periods,  raised  her  title  to 
jurisdiction.  But  when  leaving  one  topick  I  recurred  to  ano-* 
ther,  I  have  been  obliged  to  turn  back,  as  it  were,  in  order 
to  resume  the  history  of  that  particular,  also,  from  the  begin* 
ning.  My  object,  in  these  discourses,  is  not  to  give  a  narra^ 
tive  of  facts,  but  from  known  facts,  with  their  attendant  cir* 
cumstances,  by  comparing  one  with  another,  to  deduce  prin» 

&  1 


256  LECTURES  ON 

ciples  and  causes.  I  have  ah-eady  gone  so  far  this  way,  not 
with  a  view  to  supersede  the  accounts  given  by  the  historian, 
but  rather  to  enable  you  to  read  those  accounts  with  greater 
attention  and  advantage.  Many  circumstances,  apparently 
trivial,  in  a  detail  of  facts,  are  apt  to  be  overlooked  by  a  has- 
ty reader,  which  yet  may  be  of  very  considerable  consequence 
for  bringing  to  light  the  springs  of  action,  and  accounting  for 
other  things  vi'ith  which,  at  first,  to  a  superficial  observer, 
they  may  appear  to  have  little  or  no  connexion.  In  what  re- 
mains of  this  inquiry  into  the  Roman  hierarchy,  1  do  not 
intend  to  be  so  particular,  but  shall  briefly  take  notice  of  some 
of  tlie  principal  causes  (for  to  name  all  would  be  impossible) 
which  co-operated  in  rearing  this  strange  medley  of  divine  (as 
it  was  called)  and  human,  spiritual  and  secular,  dominion. 

There  is  none  who  has  read  church  history  with  the  least 
attention,  but  must  be  sensible,  that,  from  the  very  beginning 
of  papal  power,  it  has  been  much  more  considerable  and  con- 
spicuous in  the  west,  than  in  the  east.  Indeed,  for  some 
centuries,  the  Roman  pontiff  hardly  made  any  pretensions  in 
the  east,  except  in  regard  to  his  precedency,  which,  as  it  had 
been  setiled  by  early  but  tacit  consent,  ancl  preserved  by  cus- 
tom, the  eastern  prelates  were  not  disposed  to  controvert. 
But  when  from  a  bare  precedency,  in  point  of  rank,  he  came 
to  extend  his  claim  to  jurisdiction,  he  always  met  from  them 
a  vigorous  and  often  successful  opposition.  The  case  was 
not  entirely  similar  with  the  western  bishops,  over  whom  the 
pope  obtained  a  considerable  ascendant,  much  earlier  than  it 
was  in  his  power  to  do,  in  regard  to  his  oriental  brethren. 
Several  causes  may  be  assigned  for  this  difference. 

In  the  first  place,  in  some  of  the  earliest  ages,  if  we  except 
the  inhabitants  of  Rome,  Carthage,  and  some  principal  cities, 
those  in  the  west  were  in  general,  beyond  all  comparison, 
itiferiour  both  in  knowledge  and  acuteness  to  the  orientals, 
and  were  therefore  much  better  adapted  to  be  implicit  fol- 
lowers, first,  during  the  church's  worldly  obscurity,  of  the 
most  respectable  characters,  afterwards,  during  her  worldly 
splendour,  of  the  most  eminent  sees.  Victor,  bishop  of  Rome, 
in  the  violent  measures  he  adopted  against  the  Quarto-deci- 
mans,  in  Asia,  in  the  second  century,  seems  to  have  had  no 
adherents,  even  among  those,  who,  in  the  observance  of 
Easter,  the  only  point  in  dispute,  followed  the  same  custom 
■with  himself.  As  little  had  Stephen  the  first,  in  the  third 
century,  in  his  measures  against  the  African  rebaptizers  of 
those  vvho  had  been  baptized  by  hereticks  or  schismaticks. 
Ireneus,  bishop  of  Lyons,  on  account  of  his  personal  charac- 
ter, was  of  ten  times  more  authority  even  in  the  west  than 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  ^sm 

pope  Victor  ;  and  Cyprian,  bishop  of  Carthage,  than  pope 
Stephen.  But  matters  underwent  a  very  great  change  after 
Christianity  had  received  the  sanction  of  a  legal  establish- 
ment. Then  indeed  the  diiference  between  one  see  and 
another,  both  in  riches  and  in  power,  soon  became  eaormous. 
And  this  could  not  fail  to  produce,  in  the  sentiments  of  man- 
kind, the  usual  consequences.  Such  is  the  constant  progress 
in  all  human  polities  whatever.  In  the  most  simple  state  of 
society,  personal  merit,  of  some  kind  or  other,  makes  the 
only  noticeable  distinction  between  man  and  man.  In  polities, 
purely  republican,  it  is  still  the  chief  distinction.  But  the 
farther  you  recede  from  these,  and  the  nearer  you  approach  the 
monarchical  model,  the  more  does  this  natural  distinction, give 
place  to  those  artificial  distinctions,  created  by  riches,  office, 
and  rank. 

When  Rome  was  become  immensely  superiour  both  in  splen- 
dour, and  in  opulence,  to  every  western  see,  she  would,  with 
great  facility,  and,  as  it  were  naturally,  (if  nothing  very  un- 
usual or  alarming  was  attempted)  dictate  to  the  other  sees  in 
the  west ;  the  people  there  having  had,  for  several  ages,  very 
little  of  the  disputatious,  dogmatizing,  humour  of  their  bre- 
thren in  the  east.  It  no  doubt  contributed  to  the  same  effect, 
that  Rome  was  the  only  see  of  very  great  note,  which  concurred 
with  severalof  them  in  language,  Latin  being  the  predominant 
tongue  among  the  western  churches,  as  Greek  was  among  the 
eastern.  It  was  natural  for  the  former,  therefore,  to  consider 
themselves  as  more  closely  connected  with  the  Roman  patri- 
arch than  with  the  Constantinopolitan,  or  any  of  the  other 
oriental  patriarchs.  A  similar  reason,  when  not  cotmteracted 
by  other  causes,  operated  among  the  Greeks,  to  make  them 
prefer  a  Grecian  patriarch  before  a  Latin  one. 

I  acknowledge,  as  I  hinted  before,  that  this  natural  bias  Avas 
frequently  surmounted  by  other  causes.  When  the  orientals 
were  divided  into  parties  by  their  disputes,  as  was  often  the 
case,  the  Romans  could  then  obtain  almost  any  thing  from 
the  side  they  favoured,  such  was  the  violence  of  the  parties 
against  each  other.  But  this  humour,  though  it  ^vas  not  en- 
tirely without  effect,  was  but  temporary  with  them,  nnd  com- 
monly lasted  no  longer  than  the  controversy  which  gave  rise 
to  it.  Like  an  elastick  body,  though  it  may  be  vtry  much 
bent  by  the  proper  application  of  external  force,  no  sooner  vis 
the  force  removed,  than  of  itself  it  resumes  its  former  state. 
Nevertheless,  on  bodies  of  this  sort,  such  violence,  frequently 
repeated,  will  produce  some  change. 

One  thing,  which  rendered  it  very  difficult  to  effect  a  hearty 
coalition  between  Greeks  and  Latins,  was  the  contempt  which 


268  ^^OT^^CmmES  ON  •-  ' 

the  former  were,  from  early  chil(ihood,  inured  to  entertain  of 
the  genius  and  understanding  of  the  latter.  Notwithstanding 
the  superiority  the  Romans  had  obtained  over  theni  by  sub- 
duing their  country,  and  all  the  eastern  monarchies  which  had 
sprung  out  of  the  Macedonian  conquests,  the  Grecians  could 
not  help  considering  them  as  no  better  than  a  sort  of  barbar 
rians,  a  little  more  civilized  than  the  Scythians,  or  the 
Tartars.  "  These  men,"  said  Photius,  the  Greek  patri- 
arch, who,  in  the  ninth  century,  proved  the  occasion  of 
the  schism  between  the  oriental  churches  and  the  occidental ; 
these  men,  speaking  of  the  Latins,  "  sprung  from  the  darkness 
*'  of  the  west,  have  corrupted  every  thing  by  their  ignorance, 
"  and  have  even  proceeded  to  that  pitch  of  impiety  and  mad- 
*'  ness,  as  to  foist  words  into  the  sacred  symbol  confirmed  by 
>*  all  the  councils."  The  Greeks  often  bragged  that  the  Latins 
were  their  scholars.  "  They  have  nothing,"  said  they  "  which 
*'  they  have  not  gotten  from  us,  not  even  the  names  of  their 
'*  ceremonies,  mysteries,  and  dignities,  such  as  baptism,  eu- 
**  charist,  liturgy,  parish,  diocese,  bishop,  presbyter,  deacon, 
**  monk,  church,  which  they  often  stupidly  misunderstand,  and 
"  wretchedly  misapply."  But  though  the  Greeks  never  show- 
ed much  inclination  to  a  cordial  union  with  the  Latins,  they 
were  far  from  being  so  closel\  united  among  themselves  as  the 
Latins  generally  were.  I  have  already  hinted  at  some  of  the 
causes  of  this  difference  in  the  Greeks,  such  as  their  ingenuity 
Itself,  which  could  ill  brook  the  dictatorial  manner,  and  their 
disputative  and  inquisitive  turn  of  mind. 

But  there  was  another  remarkable  cause  arising  from  the 
different  constitutions  of  these  two  great  parts  of  the  empire, 
the  oriental  and  the  occidental.  The  former,  as  being  beyond 
all  comparison  the  richest,  the  most  populous,  and  the  most 
civilized,  was  sooner  brought  to  a  regular  form  of  government, 
ecclesiastical  as  well  as  civil.  I  had  before  occasion  to  ob- 
serve, that  the  ecclesiastick  polity  was,  in  a  great  measure, 
modelled  upon  the  civil.  All  the  cities  of  greatest  eminence, 
as  well  as  the  most  ancient  churches,  were  situated  in  the  east: 
Alexandria,  Antioch,  Jerusalem,  Constantinople,  Cesarea, 
Ephesus,  were  cities  of  that  note,  with  which  nothing  in  the 
west,  if  we  abstract  Rome  itself,  was  worthy  to  be  compared. 
Accordingly,  except  Milan  in  Italy,  and  Carthage  in  west 
Africa,  there  does  not  appear  to  have  been  any  bishop  in  the 
occidental  churches  above  the  rank  of  a  metropolitan. 

And  even  those  I  have  named,  Milan  and  Carthage,  were 
considerably  inferiour,  both  in  jurisdiction  and  in  wealth,  not 
only  to  the  three  great  patriarchal  sees  in  the  east,  Constanti- 
nople, Alexandria,  and  Antioch,  but  even  to  the  principal  of 
those  called  exarchal,  such  as  Ephesus  and  Cesarea.     Conse- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  269 

quently,  the  pope  had  not  in  the  west  a  single  bishop,  of  con- 
sideration and  rank,  sufficient  to  be,  in  any  degree,  qualified 
for  either  a  rival,  or  a  check.  It  is  manifest,  that  in  Gaul, 
Spain,  and  Britain,  there  were  not,  at  least  for  some  ages,  any 
who  had  the  inspection  of  more  than  a  single  province.  The 
disparity,  therefore,  was  so  exceedmgly  great  in  the  west,  as 
to  give  the  utmost  scope  for.  the  ambition  of  a  see,  which  in 
respect  of  worldly  circumstances,  had  been  so  remarkably 
distinguished. 

When  there  is  an  equality,  or  even  nearness,  in  riches  and 
power  among  those  who  share  it,  we  may  be  assured,  there  will 
always  be  emulation  ;  but  it  you  raise  one  of  the  possessors 
distinguishably  above  the  rest,  you  not  only  destroy  their  emu- 
lation, but  give  a  contrary  direction  to  their  ambition,  and 
make  them  fain  to  court  the  man  whom  they  cannot  hope 
successfully  to  emulate.  Nay,  the  very  rivalship  which  the 
rest  entertain  of  one  another,  leads  them  to  act  this  part  with 
regard  to  him  whom  more  fortunate  circumstances  has  raised 
into  their  superiour ;  that,  by  his  means,  they  may  the  more 
easily  surmount  their  equals.  Rome,  it  must  be  owned,  was 
not  at  first  considered  as  a  patriarchate.  The  whole  of  Italy 
made  but  one  civil  diocese,  which,  as  I  observed  once  before, 
was  on  account  of  its  extreme  populousness,  as  well  as  opulence, 
divided  into  two  lieutenancies,  or  vicariates.  The  one  was 
called  the  vicariate  of  Rome,  the  other  that  of  Italy  :  the  capi- 
tal of  this  last  was  Milan.  The  first  title,  therefore,  the  pope 
enjoyed,  after  the  church,  in  Constantine's  time,  had  been  mo- 
delled in  this  manner,  was  the  vicar  of  Rome,  as  the  bishop 
of  Milan  was  called  the  vicar  of  Italy  ;  nor  was  the  pope,  if  I 
remember  right,  honoured  with  the  name  of  patriarch,  though 
he  was  always  allowed  the  precedency  till  the  synod  of  Chal- 
cedon  in  the  fifth  century.  But  as  he  had  been  time  immemo- 
rial denominated  the  vicar^  and  as  it  is  not  easy  to  suppress  a 
title  firmly  established  by  custom,  it  is  not  improbable  that  the 
bishops  of  Rome,  near  that  period,  have  judged  it  more  poli- 
tical not  to  attempt  the  suppression  ;  but  to  add  to  vicar ^  by 
way  of  explanation,  in  order  to  disguise  its  inferiority,  the 
words,  of  Jesus  Christy  and  with  this  addition  to  arrogate  it 
as  peculiar. 

The  bishop  of  Milan,  who,  by  that  first  division,  was  vickr 
of  Italy,  was  on  a  foot  of  equality,  in  respect  of  his  title,  and 
even  of  the  nature,  though  not  of  the  extent  of  his  jurisdiction, 
with  the  bishop  of  Rome  ;  insomuch,  that  nothing  but  the  im- 
mense disparity  there  was  in  riches  and  splendour,  and  ulmost 
all  external  circumstances,  could  have  prevented  him  from  be- 
ing a  rival.     This  disparitv,  hov/ever,  did  effectually  prevejit 


,2r©  LECTURES  ON 

all  rivalry,  and  make  it  conducive  both  to  the  interest  and  to 
the  ambition  of  the  former,  to  forward,  instead  of  opposing, 
the  designs  of  the  latter.  It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  the 
popes,  even  from  the  beginning,  had  in  the  west  incomparably 
a  more  advantageous  situation  for  the  acquisition  of  power, 
than  any  patriarch  in  the  east  was  possessed  of.  It  is,  in  like 
manner,  evident,  and  might  almost  have  been  concluded  be- 
forehand, that  he  could  not,  without  a  concurrence  of  events 
quite  extraordinary,  have  brought  the  oriental  to  the  same  im- 
plicit submission  and  obedience  to  which  he  actually  brought 
the  occidental  churches. 

It  is  proper  also  here  to  observe  another  fortunate  circum- 
stance, which  operated  very  early  for  the  advancement  of  his 
authority.  To  the  vicarage  of  Rome  belonged  ten  provinces, 
including  the  islands  Sicily,  Corsica,  and  Sardinia.  As  in 
these  there  were  no  metropolitans,  as  all  were  under  the  im- 
mediate jurisdiction  of  the  capital  itself,  and  thence  were  de- 
nominated suburbicary  provinces,  the  vicar  of  Rome,  or  pope, 
as  he  was  called,  had  not  only  all  the  power  of  an  exarch  over 
the  v/hole  ten  provinces,  but  that  also  of  the  primate  in  every 
province.  There  was  in  him  a  coalition  of  both  jurisdictions, 
the  metropolitical  and  the  patriarchal.  As  the  metropolitan 
had  the  charge  of  ordaining  the  bishops  of  his  province,  and 
the  patriarch  that  of  ordaining  the  metropolitans,  the  bishop 
of  Rome  had  the  charge,  either  by  himself,  or  by  his  delegates, 
of  ordaining  every  bishop  within  the  provinces  of  his  vicariate. 
These  rights  he  gradually  extended,  as  circumstances  favour- 
ed his  views,  first  to  the  whole  prefecture  of  Italy,  which  in- 
cluded west  Illyricum,  and  west  Africa,  afterwards  to  all  the 
occidental  churches,  Gaul,  Spain,  and  Britain  ;  and  lastly,  as 
of  divine  right,  and  therefore  unalienable,  over  the  whole  ca- 
tholick  church.  This  last  claim,  however,  hath  subsisted  only 
in  theory. 

That  these  pretensions  were  introduced  gradually  is  a  fact 
indisputable.  Pope  Leo,  in  one  of  his  letters  still  extant,  to 
the  bishops  of  Gaul,  explicitly  disclaims  tht-  right  of  ordaining 
them.  That  pontiff  was  not  deficient  either  in  ambition  or  in 
abilities.  And  one  would  have  thought  he  might  have  been 
better  instructed  in  the  divine  and  unalienable  rights  of  his  see, 
if  any  conception  of  such  rights  had  been  entertained  in  his 
time.  But  the  zenith  of  the  hierarchy  was  too  sublime  a  pin- 
nacle to  be  attained  by  a  few  bold  leaps.  It  was  by  innumer- 
able steps,  not  considerable,  taken  severally,  that  that  amazin'g 
and  dizzy  height  at  length  was  reached.  It  was  not  till  after 
repeated  successes  in  the  attainments  of  objects  far  below  the 
summit,  that  this  great  antitype  of  Lucifer  said  in  his  heart, 
I  will  ascend  into  heaven^  Ixvill  exalt  my  throne  above  the  stars 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  271 

of  God ;  I  will  sit  upon  the  mount  of  the  congregation^  (or 
cliurch,  as  the  word  imports)  /  will  ascend  above  the  heights 
of  the  clouds^  I  will  be  like  the  Most  High.  But  to  return, 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  want  of  patriarchs  in  the  west 
did  greatly  facilitate  the  attempts  of  the  Roman  pontiff  to  sup- 
ply their  place,  first  in  consecrating  their  metropolitans,  and 
afterwards  even  in  ordaining  the  suffragans. 

Again,  one  great  advantage  which  Rome  derived  from  her 
vast  opulence  and  rich  domains,  both  in  Italy  and  in  the  neigh- 
bouring islands,  was  the  power  she  acquired  of  employing  and 
supporting  missions,  in  distant  parts  of  Europe,  for  the  pro- 
pagation of  the  gospel.  When  by  means  of  missions  and  ex- 
pence  churches  were  planted  in  any  country,  they  were  always 
accounted  dependent  on  that  as  the  mother  church  by  whom 
the  missionaries  were  employed.  In  this  manner,  by  the  monk 
Augustine,  a  missionary  of  Gregory  the  first,  the  Anglo-Saxons 
in  Britain  were  converted  from  idolatry  near  the  end  of  the 
sixth  century.  The  Britons,  or  ancient  inhabitants,  had  in- 
deed been  christians  for  some  ages  before.  But  they  were 
ere  now  dispossessed  of  their  ancient  habitations,  and  confined 
by  those  new  comers  to  a  small  part  of  the  island,  the  princi- 
pality of  Wales.  In  the  beginning  of  the  eighth  century,  the 
Germans  were,  in  like  manner,  converted  by  Winfrid,  or  Bo- 
niface, a  missionary  of  Gregory  the  second,  which  Boniface,  I 
may  remark  in  passing,  is  the  first  ecciesiastick  on  record,  who 
took  a  solemn  oath  of  fealty  to  St.  Peter,  that  is,  to  the  Roman 
see,  a  security  which  was  afterwards  exacted  by  the  pope,  not 
only  of  all  legates  and  servants  of  his  court,  but  of  all  bishops 
whatever  ;  and  the  more  effectually  to  prevent  its  being  omit- 
ted,' it  was  engrossed  in  the  pontifical,  among  the  riles  to  be 
observed  in  consecration.  Nor  did  a  question  of  this  kind  of 
pre-occupancy  prove,  about  a  century  afterwards,  the  least  con- 
siderable cause  of  the  great  schism  till  subsisting  between  the 
oriental  and  the  occidental  churches.  The  disputed  titles  of 
Ignatius  and  Photius  to  the  patriarchate  of  Constantinople, 
and  even  the  differences  in  doctrine  and  ceremonies  between 
the  Latins  and  the  Greeks,  vv ouid  have  been  much  more  easily 
adjusted  than  the  lucrative  pretensions  that  both  Rome  and 
Constantinople  made  to  the  superiority  and  patronage  of  the 
new  converted  churches  of  Bulgaria.  That  of  right  from  all. 
the  principles  which  then  prevailed,  they  should  have  been  de- 
pendent on  the  Constantinopolitan  patriarch,  can  scarcely  be 
made  a  doubt.  But  Rome  was  ever  interfering  ;  and  this  was 
too  great  an  acquisition  to  lose  sight  of.  Paul,  indeed,  avoid- 
ed to  promulge  the  gospel  in  places  where  Christ  had  already 
been  made  known,  lest  he  should  build  ou  another  man's  foun- 


2i?2  LECTURES  ON 

datlon,  and  thereby  bestow  his  time  and  labour  less  profitably' 
for  the  common  cause.  That  maxim  answered  admirably, 
when  the  end  v»^as  the  advancement  of  a  spiritual  kingdom, 
peace,  and  truth,  and  righteousness,  the  honour  of  God,  and 
happiness  of  mankind.  He  might  then  well  say,  that  Christ 
is  preached,  wheresoever  and  by  whomsoever,  I  do,  and  will, 
rejoice.  But  the  case  was  quite  altered  v/hen  conversions  to  a 
nominal  more  than  real  Christianity,  were  made  the  instru- 
ments of  a  new  sort  of  conquest,  mere  engines  for  extending 
ecclesiastical  dominion.  Constantinople  could  do  a  good  deal 
in  this  way,  but  Rome  still  more. 

I  shall  mention  another  excellent  piece  of  papal  policy,  first 
introduced  by  Damasus,  near  the  end  of  the  fourth  century, 
and  commonly  called  the  legatine  power.  Fhe  introduction  of 
this  pi-actice,  and  what  gave  rise  to  it,  I  shall  give  you  from 
our  English  biographer's  history  of  that  pope. — "  Acholius, 
*'  bishop  of  Thessalonica,  was  the  first  who  enjoyed,  under 
"  Damasus,  the  title  of  the  pope's  vicar.  He  was  nominated 
"  to  this  office,  in  east  lUyricum,  on  the  following  occasion : 
*'  lUyricum,  comprising  all  ancient  Greece,  and  many  pro- 
"  vinces  on  the  Danube,  whereof  Sirmium  was  the  capital, 
"  had,  ever  since  the  time  ol  Constantine,  belonged  to  the 
"western  empire.  But  in  the  year  379,  Dacia  and  Greece 
"  were,  by  Gracian,  disjoined  from  the  more  westerly  pro- 
"  vinces,  and  added,  in  favour  of  i'heodosius,  to  the  eastern 
*'  empire,  being  known  by  the  name  of  east  lUyricum,  whereof 
"  Thessalonica,  the  metropolis  of  Macedon,  was  the  chief 
"  city.  The  bishops  of  Rome,  as  presiding  in  the  metropolis 
"  of  the  empire,  had  begun  to  claim  a  kind  of  jurisdiction,  or 
"  rather  inspection,  in  ecclesiastical  matters,  over  all  the  pro- 
"  vinces  of  the  western  empire  ;  which  was  the  first  great  step 
"  whereby  they  ascended  to  the  supremacy,  ihey  afterwards 
*'  claimed  and  established.  This  Damasus  was  unwilling  to 
"  resign,  with  respect  to  Illyricum,  even  after  that  country 
"  was  dismembered  from  the  western,  and  added  to  the  eastern 
"  empire.  In  order,  therefore,  to  maintain  his  claim,  he  ap» 
"  pointed  Acholius,  bishop  of  Thessalonica,  to  act  in  his 
"  stead  ;  vesting  in  hira  the  power  whith  he  pretended  to  have 
*'  over  those  provinces.  Upon  the  death  of  Acholius,  he  con- 
**■  ferred  the  same  dignity  on  his  successour  Anysius,  as  did 
"  the  following  popes  on  the  succeeding  bishops  of  Thessalo- 
"nica;  who,  by  thus  supporting  the  pretensions  of  Rome, 
"  became  the  first  bishops,  and,  in  a  manner,  the  patriarchs  of 
*'  east  Illyricum,  for  thev  are  sometimes  distinguished  with 
"  that  title.  This,  however,  was  not  done  without  opposition, 
"  the  other  metropolitans  not  readily  acknowledging  for  their 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  2f3 

**  superiour  6fae  who,  till  that  time,  had  been  their  equal.  Sy- 
*f  ricius,  who  Succeeded  Damasus,  enlarging  the  power  clj^im- 
^■'^"^d  by  his  predecessor,  decreed,  that  no  bishop  should  be 
"^  ordained  in  east  Illyricum  without  the  consent  and  approbd.^ 
"  tion  of  the  bishop  of  Thessalonica.  But  it  Was  some  time 
"  before  this  decree  took  place.  Thus  Were  the  bishops  of 
"  Thessalonica  first  appointed  vicegerents  of  the  bishops  of 
"  Rome,  probably  in  the  year  382.  Ihe  contrivance  of  Da- 
*'  masus  was  notably  improved  by  his  successours,  who,  in 
*'  order  to  extend  their  authority,  conferred  the  title  of  theit- 
"  vicars,  and  the  pretendedpower  annexed  to  it,  on  the  most 
-**  eminent  prelates  of  other  provinces  arid  kingdoms,  engaging 
'*  them  thereby  to  depend  upon  them,  and  to  promote  the 
*'  authority  of  their  see,  lo  the  Utter  suppression  of  the  ancient 
"  rights  and  liberties  both  of  bishops  and  synods.  This  dig- 
"  nity  was,  for  the  most  part,  annexed  to  certain  sees,  but 
*'  sometimes  conferred  on  particular  persons.  The  institutioii 
"  of  vicars  was,  by  succeeding  popes,  improved  into  that  of 
*'  legates  ;  or,  to  lise  De  Marca's  expression,  the  latter  institu- 
"  tion  was  grafted  on  the  former.  The  legates  were  vested 
*'  with  a  far  greater  power  than  the  vicars  ;  or,  as  pope  Led 
*'  expresses  it,  were  admitted  to  a  far  greater  share  of  his  care, 
**  though  not  to  the  plenitude  of  his  power-  They  were  sent, 
*'  oil  proper  occasions,  into  all  countries,  and  never  failed  ex- 
"  etting,  to  the  utmost  stretch,  their  boasted  power,  oppress- 
**  ing,  in  virtue  of  their  paramount  authority,  the  clergy  as 
**  #ell  as  the  people,  and  extorting  from  both  large  sums,  to 
"support  the  pomp  and  luxury  in  which  they  lived." 

Thus  far  our  historian.  Nothing,  indeed,  could  be  better 
calculated,  for  both  extending  and  securing  their  authority, 
tJian  thus  engaging  all  the  most  eminent  prelates  in  the  differ- 
titt  countries  of  Christendom,  from  a  principle  of  ambition,  as 
wfeU  as  interest,  to  favour  their  claims.  Rome  was  already 
gotten  too  far,  as  we  have  seen,  above  the  episcopal  sees  of  the 
iw^est,  for  any  of  them  to  think  of  coping  with  her,  and  was, 
besides,  too  distant  to  excite  their  envy.  But  it  would  greatly 
gratify  the  covetousness,  as  well  as  the  pride  and  vanity,  of 
those  bishops  whom  she  was  thus  pleased  to  distinguish,  to  be, 
by  her  means,  raised  considerably  above  their  peers  and  neigh- 
tidurs. 

Add  to  this,  that  not  only  the  ambitious  views  of  individuals 
served  to  promote  the  schemes  of  Rome,  but  the  general  am- 
bition of  the  clerical  order  greatly  forwarded  her  view*s.  The 
western  empire  soon  came  to  be  divided  into  a  number  of  in- 
dependent states  and  kingdoms.  Now  in  the  form  into  which 
the  church  had  been  moulded  before  the  division,  a  foundatioji 

34  m 


274  LECTURES  ON 

had  been  laid  for  incessant  interferings  and  bickerings,  in 
every  country,  between  the  secular  powers  and  the  ecclesias- 
tical. In  these  interferings,  the  principal  advantage  of  the 
latter  arose  from  the  union  that  subsisted  among  the  churches 
of  different  countries,  as  members  of  one  great  polity.  And 
even  this  connexion,  (however  possible  it  might  have  been  to 
preserve  it  for  the  single  purpose  of  promoting  piety  and  vir- 
tue) it  was  absolutely  impossible  to  preserve,  for  the  purpose 
of  spiritual  dominion,  unless  they  were  united  under  a  com- 
mon head.  The  republican  form  of  any  kind,  democratical 
oraristocratical,could  never  answer  in  such  a  situation  of  affairs. 
Not  are  only  commonwealths  slower  in  their  operations  than  the 
exigencies  of  such  a  state  would  admit,  but  they  can  do  nothing 
without  the  authority  of  a  legislative  council ;  and  this  it 
would  be  in  the  power  of  a  few  temporal  princes  totally  to  ob- 
struct, either  by  preventing  them  from  assembling,  or  by  dis- 
persing them  when  assembled.  And  from  any  state,  or  king 
dom,  it  would  be  in  the  power  of  the  chief  magistrate  to  pre- 
vent a  deputation  being  sent.  The  monarchical  form,  there- 
fore, supported  b}-  the  prejudices  and  superstition  of  the  peo- 
ple, was  the  only  adequate  means  both  of  preserving  and  of 
extending  the  high  privileges,  honours,  titles,  and  immunities, 
claimed  universally  by  the  sacred  order,  and  which  they  most 
strenuously  contended  for,  as  the  quintessence  of  Christianity, 
the  sum  of  all  that  the  Son  of  God  had  purchased  for  man- 
kind. This  could  not  fail  to  induce  them  to  put  themselves 
under  the  protection  of  the  only  bishop  in  the  west,  who  was 
both  able  and  willing  to  support  their  bold  pretensions. 

I  must  likewise  add,  however  unlikely,  that  the  ambition 
of  secular  princes  concurred  in  the  establishment  and  exalta- 
tion of  the  hierarchy.  Nothing  can  be  more  evident,  than 
that  it  was  the  interest  of  the  princes  of  Christendom,  and 
their  people,  to  combine  against  it.  But  though  this  was  the 
general  and  most  lasting  interest  of  all  the  states  of  Europe, 
what  was,  or  at  least  was  conceived  to  be,  the  immediate  in- 
terest of  a  particular  prince,  or  state,  might  be  to  favour  the 
hierarchy.  Let  it  be  observed,  that  the  European  monarchs 
were  almost  incessantly  at  war  with  one  another.  Neighbour 
and  enemy,  when  spoken  of  states  and  kingdoms,  were,  and 
to  this  day  too  much  arc,  terms  almost  synonymous.  The 
pope,  therefore,  could  not  make  even  the  most  daring  attempt 
against  any  prince,  or  kingdom,  which  would  not  be  powerful- 
ly backed  by  the  most  strenuous  endeavours  of  some  other 
prince,  or  kingdom,  whose  present  designs  the  pope's  at- 
tempts would  tend  to  forward. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  275 

If  England  was  the  object  of  papal  resentment,  if  the  en- 
raged ecclesiarch  had  fulminated  an  excommunication,  or  in- 
terdict, against  the  kingdom,  or  issued  a  bull  deposing  the 
king,  and  loosing  his  subjects  from  their  oaths  and  allegiance^ 
(for  all  these  spiritual  machines  were  brought  into  use  one  af- 
ter another)  France  was  ready  to  take  advantage  of  the  gene- 
ral confusion  thereby  raised  in  England,  and  to  invade  the 
kingdom  with  an  armed  force.  The  mors?  to  encourage  the 
French  monarch  to  act  this  part,  the  pontiff  might  be  prevail- 
ed on  (and  this  hath  actually  happened)  to  assign  to  him  the 
kingdom  of  which  he  had  pretended  to  divest  the  owner.  A 
mun  mav  afford  to  give  what  never  belonged  to  him.  But  i£ 
the  owner  found  it  necessary  to  make  submissions  to  the  priest, 
the  latter  was  never  at  a  loss  to  find  a  pretext  for  recalling  the 
grant  he  had  made,  and  re-establishing  the  degraded  mon-. 
arch.  In  like  manner,  when  France  was  the  object  of  the 
pontiff's  vengeance,  England  was  equally  disposed  to  be  sub- 
servient to  his  views.  Nay,  he  had  the  address,  oftener  than 
once,  to  arm  an  unnatural  son  against  his  father.  Such  was 
the  situation  of  affairs  all  Europe  orer.  Those  transactions, 
which  always  terminated  in  the  advancement  of  papal  power, 
could  not  fail,  at  last,  to  raise  the  mitre  above  the  crown. 
Every  one  of  the  princes,  I  may  say,  did,  in  his  turn,  for 
the  gratifying  of  a  present  passion,  and  the  attaining  of  an 
immediate  object,  blindly  lend  his  assistance,  in  exalting  a  po- 
tentate, who  came,  in  process  of  time,  to  tread  on  all  their 
necks,  and  treat  both  kings  and  emperours,  who  had  foolishly 
given  their  strength  and  power  to  him,  as  his  vassals  and 
slaves. 

It  were  endless  to  take  notice  of  all  the  expedients,  which 
Rome,  after  she  had  advanced  so  far,  a^  to  be  esteemed  in  the 
west  the  visible  head  of  the  church  universal,  and  vested  with 
a  certain  paramount,  though  indefinite  authority,  over  the 
whole  :  devised,  and  easily  executed,  both  for  confirming  and 
extending  her  enormous  power.  It  is  true,  she  never  was  ab- 
solute in  the  east ;  and,  from  about  the  middle  of  the  ninth 
century,  these  two  parts  of  Christendom  were  in  a  state  of  to- 
tal separation.  But  that  became  a  matter  of  less  consequence 
to  her  every  day.  The  eastern,  which  may  be  said  to  have 
been  the  only  enlightened,  and  far  the  most  valuable  part  of 
the  empire,  in  the  days  of  Constanttne,  was  daily  declining, 
whilst  the  western  part  was  growing  daily  more  considerable. 
In  the  eastern  empire,  one  part  after  another  became  a  prey  to 
Turks  and  Saracens, — Egypt,  Barbary,  Syria,  Asia,  and  at 
length  Greece,  Macedonia,  and  Thrace.  The  only  part  of- 
the  western  empire  that  not  only  was,  but  still  continues  to  be,^ 


276*  LECTURES  ON 

subjected  to  the  depredations  of  these  barbarians,  is  proconsular 
and  west  Africa.  Whereas,  in  the  western,  and  northern 
parts  of  Europe,  there  were,  at  the  same  time,  springing  up 
some  of  the  most  powerful  and  polished,  and,  I  may  now  add, 
the  most  enlightened  monarchies  and  states,  with  which  the 
world  has  ever  been  acquainted.  The  very  calamities  of  the 
east,  particularly  the  destruction  of  the  eastern  empire,  the 
last  poor  remains  of  Roman  greatness,  and  the  taking  of 
Constantinople  by  the  Turks,  left  the  western  patriarch  total- 
ly without  a  rival,  and  Christendom  without  a  vestige  of  the 
primitive  equality  and  independence  of  its  pastors. 

When  Rome  had  every  thing,  in  a  manner,  at  her  disposal, 
it  was  easy  to  see  that  all  canons,  in  regard  to  discipline,  and  de- 
crees, in  relation  to  doctrine,  would  point  invariably  to  the 
support  of  this  power.  Hence  the  convenient  doctrines  of 
transubstantiation,  purgatory,  prayers  and  masses  for  the  dead, 
auricular  confession,  the  virtue  of  sacerdotal  absolution. 
Hence  the  canons  extending  so  immensely  the  forbidden  de- 
grees of  marriage,  the  peculiar  power  in  the  popes  of  dispens- 
ing with  these,  and  other  canons,  the  power  of  canonization, 
the  celibacy  of  the  clergy,  the  supererogatory  merits  of  the 
saints,  indulgences,  and  many  others. 

There  is  indeed  one  right  that  has  been  claimed,  and  sucess* 
fully  exerted,  by  Rome,  which,  as  being  a  most  important 
spring  in  this  great  and  complex  machine  of  the  hierarchy,  will 
deserve  a  more  particular  notice.  I  mean,  the  pope's  pretended 
title  to  grant  exemptions  to  whomsoever  he  pleases,  from  sub- 
jeetion  to  their  ordinary  ecclesiastical  superiours.  But  this  X 
shall  reserve  for  the  subject  of  another  lecture. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  fi77 


LECTURE  XIX. 


JC  ROM  what  has  been  discovered,  in  the  course  of  our  in- 
quiries into  the  rise,  the  progress,  and  the  full  establishment 
of  the  papacy,  we  may  justly  say,  that  if  happiness  consist  in 
dominion,  (which  it  certainly  does  not,  though  all  mankind, 
by  their  conduct,  seem  to  think  it)  what  a  wonderful  good 
fortune  has  ever  attended  Rome  !  From  the  first  foundation 
of  the  city,  by  a  parcel  of  banditti,  she  rose  but  to  command, 
s^nd  gradually  advanced  into  an  empire  of  such  extent,  renown, 
and  duration,  as  has  been  unexampled  in  the  world,  either  be- 
fore or  since.  And  from  the  first  declension  of  that  enormous 
power,  for  it  could  not  subsist  always,  she  is  insensibly  become 
the  seat  of  a  new  species  of  empire,  which,  though  not  of  equal 
celebrity  with  the  former,  is  much  more  extraoi  dinary,  and 
perhaps  more  difficult  to  be  surmounted,  being  deeply  rooted 
in  the  passions  and  sentiments  of  men. 

Nay,  how  fortunate  has  been  this  queen  of  cities  in  what 
concerned  both  the  formation  and  the  advancement  of  this  se- 
cond monarchy.  She  continued  the  imperial  city  during  the 
nonage  of  the  hieraT':h\,  that  is,  as  long  as  was  necessary  to 
give  her  priest,  though  under  the  humble  title  of  pastor,  the 
primacv,  or  precedency  among  his  brethren,  for  these  two 
terms  were  at  first  synonymous,  and  by  the  wealth  and  splen- 
dour to  which  she  raised  him,  to  lay  the  foundation  of  those 
higherfclaims  he  hath  since  made,  of  supremacyand  jurisdiction 
over  them.  And  she  ceased  to  be  the  seat  of  empire  at  the 
critical  period,  when  the  nsidence  of  a  court  must  have  eclips-. 
ed  his  lustre,  confined  him  to  a  subordinate  part  on  the  great 
theatre  of  the  world,  and  stifled,  in  the  birth,  all  attempts  to 
raise  himself  above  the  secular  powers.  Had  the  eastern  em- 
pire remained  to  this  da\',  and  Constantinople  been  the  impe- 
rial residence,  it  would  h,iv^  been  impossible  that  her  patri- 
archs should  ever  have  advanced  the  claims  which  the  Roman 


278  LECTURES  ON 

patriarch  fiot  only  advanced,  but  compelled  the  christian  world 
to  admit.  When  Rome  was  deserted  by  the  emperours,  her 
pontiiF  quickly  became  the  first  man  there  ;  and  in  the  course 
of  a  few  reigns,  the  inhabitants  came  naturally  to  consider 
themselves  as  more  connected  with  him,  and  interested  in 
him,  than  in  an  emperour  who,  under  the  name  of  their  sove- 
reign, had  his  residence  and  court  in  a  distant  country,  who 
spoke  a  different  language,  and  whose  face  the  greater  part  of 
the  Romans  did  not  so  much  as  know.  Nor  was  the  matter 
much  mended  in  regard  to  them  after  the  division  of  the  em- 
pire, as  the  royal  residence,  neither  of  the  emperour  of  the 
West,  nor  afterwards  of  the  king  of  the  Goths,  was  Rome^ 
but  either  Milan  or  Ravenna. 

And  when  in  succeeding  ages  the  pope  grew  to  be,  in  some 
respect,  a  rival  to  the  German  emperour,  the  Romans,  and 
even  many  of  the  Italians,  came  to  think,  as  it  might  have 
been  foreseen  that  they  would,  that  their  own  aggrandize- 
ment, the  aggrandizement  of  their  city,  and  of  their  country, 
were  more  concerned  in  the  exaltation  of  the  pontiff,  who, 
by  the  way,  was  then,  in  a  great  measure,  a  creature  of  their 
own  making,  (for  the  office  was  not  then,  as  now,  in  the 
election  of  the  conclave)  than  in  that  of  a  monarch,  who,  from 
whatever  origin  he  derived  his  power,  was,  in  fact,  an  alienj^' 
and  not  of  their  creation,  and  who  was  as  ill  situated  for 
defending  them  against  their  enemies,  as  the  successours  of 
Constantine  had  been  before.  Of  the  inability  of  both  to 
answer  this  purpose,  the  invasions  and  conquests  made  at 
different  times  by  Goths  and  Lombards,  Franks  and  Nor- 
mans, but  too  plainly  showed.  In  short,  had  Rome  never 
been  the  imperial  city,  its  pastor  could  never  have  raised 
himself  above  his  fellows.  Had  it  continued  the  imperial 
city,  he  might,  and  probably  would  have  had,  such  a  primacy, 
as  to  be  accounted  the  first  among  the  patriarchs,  but  without 
any  thing  like  papal  jurisdiction  over  church  and  state.  Had 
Rome  remained  the  seat  '.f  empire,  the  pope's  superiority  to 
councils  had  never  been  heard  of.  The  convocation  of  these, 
whilst  the  empire  subsisted,  would,  in  all  probability,  have 
continued,  as  it  was  for  several  ages,  in  the  hands  of  the  em- 
perour. The  dismemberment  of  the  empire  tended  but  too 
visibly  to  subvert  the  emperour's  claim,  and  occasion  the 
setting  up  of  another  in  its  stead.  A  sovereign  has  no  title 
to  convoke  the  subjects  of  another  sovereign,  of  whatever 
class  they  be,  and  call  them  out  of  his  dominions,  whatever 
title  he  may  have  to  assemble  any  part  of  his  own  subjectSi 
within  his  own  territories.  Now  whatever  weakened  the 
emperour's  claim,  strengthened  the  pope's.  Immemorial  cua- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  270 

torn  had  taught  men  to  consider  councils  as  essential  to  the 
church.  And  if  the  right  to  call  them  could  no  longer  be 
regarded  as  inherent  in  any  secular  prince,  where  would  they 
so  readily  suppose  it  to  inhere  as  in  him,  to  whose  primacy  in 
the  church  they  had  been  already  habituated  ?  And  even  afteij^ 
the  dismemberment  of  the  empire,  and  the  succession  of  a 
new  power  over  part,  under  the  same  title,  had  it  been  possible 
for  the  emperours  of  Germany,  who,  in  the  former  part  of  the 
eleventh  century,  made  and  unmade  popes  at  their  pleasure, 
to  have  made  Rome  their  residence,  and  the  capital  of  their 
empire,  the  pope,  as  Voltaire  justly  observes,  had  been  no 
other  than  the  emperour's  chaplain.  Nay,  much  of  the  power 
which  the  former,  in  that  case,  would  have  been  permitted  to 
exercise,  would  have  been  more  nominal  than  real,  as  it  would 
have  been  exercised  under  the  influence  of  a  superiour.  But 
luckily  for  the  pope  and  for  Italy,  to  reside  at  Rome,  was 
what  the  emperour  could  not  do,  and  at  the  same  time  retain 
possession  of  his  German  dominions,  of  which  he  was  only 
the  elective  sovereign. 

The  obscurity  of  the  western,  in  the  beginning,  compared 
with  the  oriental  churches,  occasioned  that  their  ecclesiastick 
polity  was  left  imperfect,  so  as  to  give  Rome  too  great  an 
ascendancy  in  that  part  of  the  world  ;  the  gradual  but  inces- 
sant decline  of  those  eastern  nations,  whose  opulent  sees  were 
alone  capable  of  proving  a  counterpoise  to  the  power  of  Rome; 
and,  on  the  other  hand,  the  slow,  but  real  advancement  of  the 
occidental  countries,  after  the  power  of  the  pontiff  had  been 
firmly  established;  their  real,  but  late  advancement, •  in  arts, 
populousness,  wealth,  and  civilization,  all  alike  conspired  to 
raise  him.     His  rivals  sank,  his  subjects  rose. 

For  many  ages  he  seemed  to  have  conceived  no  higher 
aim  than  to  be  at  the  head  of  the  executive  and  the  judicial 
power  in  the  church.  No  sooner  was  that  attained  than  his 
great  object  came  to  be  the  legislative  power.  You  do  not  find, 
for  several  centuries,  the  least  pretext  made  by  the  pope,  of  a 
title  to  establish  canons,  or  ecclesiastical  laws  ;  his  pretence 
was  merely,  that  he  was  intrusted  with  the  care,  that  the  laws 
enacted  by  councils  should  be  duly  executed.  He  was  then 
only,  as  it  were,  the  chief  magistrate  of  the  community ; 
nothing  now  will  satisfy  him  but  to  be  their  legislator  also,  A 
doctrine  came  accordingly  much  in  vogue  with  the  partisans 
of  Rome,  that  the  pope  was  not  subject  to  councils,  nay,  that 
he  was  not  only  independent  of  them,  but  above  them  ;  that 
he  was  himself  entitled  to  make,  canons,  to  declare  articles 
of  faith,  to  pronounce  what  was  orthodox,  what  heterodos^, 
and  that  he  needed  not  the  aid  of  any  council. 


28®  LECTURES  ON 

^tI£  such  were  really  the  case,  all  the  world,  popes  as  well  as 
others,  had  been  greatly  deceived  for  many  ages.  When  an 
effectaal  remedy  was  at  hand,  they  had  thought  it  necessary 
to  take  a  very  ditficult  and  circuitous  method  to  attain  a  cure, 
at  most  not  more  certain.  To  what  purpose  bring  such  a 
multitude  together  from  all  the  quarters  of  the  globe,  with 
great  expense  and  infinite  trouble,  to  tell  us,  after  whole  days 
spent  in  chicane,  sophistr}',  and  wrangling,  what  one  single 
person  could  have  told  us  at  the  first,  as  soon  as  he  was  con- 
sulted; In  all  these  diflPerent  claims,  made,  at  different  periods 
by  the  pontiff,  though  he  generally  succeeded  at  last,  he  never 
failed  to  encounter  some  opposition.  It  has,  however,  on 
this  article  of  the  pope's  authority,  been  justlv  observed,  that 
tlie  advocates  for  it  have  been  much  more  numerous  than 
those  for  the  authority  of  councils.  The  manner  in  which 
jEneas  Sylvius,  who  was  himself  afterwards  raised  to  the 
popedom,  under  the  name  of  Pius  II,  accounted  for  this  dif- 
ference, is  strictly  just  :  "  Because,"  said  he,  "  the  popes  have 
"benefices  to  give,  and  the  councils  have  none."  Whether 
he  would  have  returned  the  same  answer,  after  he  had  reached 
the  summit  of  ecclesiastical  preferment,  may  be  justly  made 
a  question.  Certain  it  is,  that  the  pontiffs  cannot  be  charged 
with  want  of  attention  to  those  who  have  stood  forth  as  cham- 
pions for  their  authority.  Whereas  there  is  hardh'  a  motive, 
except  a  regard  to  truth,  which  can  induce  any  one,  in  Roman 
catholick  countries,  to  defend  the  other  side  of  the  question. 
For  on  this  article  there  are  different  opinions  even  among 
Roman  catholicks.  This,  however,  is  a  point  of  which  there 
has  never  been  any  decision  that  has  been  universallv  ac- 
quiesced in  ;  and,  indeed,  on  the  footing  whereon  matters 
now  stand  in  that  church,  we  may  affirm,  with  great  proba- 
bility, that  it  will  alvva\s  remain  undecided. 

In  the  conclusion  of  mv  last  lecture,  I  mentioned  orte  great 
engine  of  papal  policy,  the  exemptions  p-ranted  by  the  pontiffs 
to  particular  ecclesiasticks  or  communities,  bv  which  their 
subjection  to  the  ordinary  was  dispensed  with,  and  their 
dependence  rendered  immediate  upon  Rome.  The  legatine 
power,  of  which  I  have  already  spoken,  was  somcvhat  of  the 
same  nature,  though  it  had  a  more  plausible  excuse.  Rut 
exemptions  were  not  limited  to  tho'^e  who  might  be  con- 
sidered as  a  sort  of  agents  for  the  pontiff,  and  employed  tc» 
represent  his  person.  He  pretended  a  title  to  make  such' 
alterations  in  the  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  of  any  country  as 
he  should  judge  proper,  and  particularly  to  exempt  bishops, 
when  he  found  it  convenient,  from  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
archbishop,  priors  and  abbots,  from,  that  of  the  bishop.     This 


ECCLESiASTiCAL  HISTORY.  281 

privilege  came  at  length  to  be  so  far  extended,  that  almost  all 
the  orders  of  regulars,  and  the  universities,  were  taken,  as  it 
was  termed,  under  the  pope's  immediate  care  and  protection, 
that  is,  released  from  all  subordination  to  the  secular  clergy, 
in  whose  dioceses  they  were  situated,  or  might  happen  to 
reside. 

For  several  ages  after  the  church  had  been  modelled  on  th<i 
plan  of  the  civil  government  under  Constantine,  it  was  con- 
sidered as  a  thing  totally  inadmissible,  that  a  presbyter  should 
withdraw  his  obedience  from  his  bishop,  a  bishop  from  his 
metropolitan,  or  a  metropolitan  from  his  exarch  or  patriarch^ 
where  there  was  an  ecclesiastick  vested  with  that  dignity. 
Accordingly,  in  the  oriental  churches^  nothing  of  this  sort 
was  ever  attempted.  And,  indeed,  if  the  aristocratical  form: 
then  given  to  the  church  had  continued  unviolated  also  in  the 
west,  such  an  attempt  never  had  been  made.  But  to  say  thie 
truth,  there  was  no  possibility  of  supporting  the  monarchical 
form  now  given  to  the  occidental  churches,  without  some 
measure  of  this  kind. 

It  is  true,  there  had  been  established  a  subordination  in  all 
the  clerical  orders,  from  the  pope  downwards  to  the  most  me- 
nial officer  in  the  church.  The  pope  was  the  judge  in  the  last 
resort,  and  claimed  the  exclusive  title  to  give  confirmation  and 
investiture  to  all  the  dignitaries.  Rome,  by  her  exactions,  as 
well  as  by  the  frequent  recourse  to  her  from  all  parts,  for  dis- 
pensations, and  the  like  trumpery,  as  we  should  call  them, 
which  had  gradually  obtained,  and  were  then  of  the  most  seri* 
ous  consequence,  had  taken  all  imaginable  care,  that  the  seve* 
ral  churches  might  not  forget  their  subjection  and  dependence. 
Yet  however  sufficient  this  might  have  proved  in  a  single  king* 
dom,  or  country,  such  as  Italy,  where  the  whole  is  more  im- 
mediately under  the  eye  of  the  governours,  who  can  quickly 
giet  notice  of,  and  provide  against  a  rising  faction,  before  it 
bring  any  purpose  to  maturity,  it  is  far  from  being  sufficient 
in  a  wide-established  empire.  The  primates,  or  archbishops, 
and  even  some  of  the  wealthiest  bishops.  Were  like  great  feu* 
datory  lords.  They  owed  a  certain  acknowledgment  and  duty 
to  their  liege-lord  the  pope  ;  but  the  dependence  of  the  infe- 
riour  clergy,  the  suffragans  and  priests,  like  that  of  the  Vassals 
upon  the  barons,  was  immediately  or  directly  on  the  prelates, 
and  but  indirectly  and  remotely  upon  the  pope.  As  whilst  the 
feudal  government  subsisted,  the  greater  barons,  in  most  king- 
doms, with  their  train  of  vassals  and  dependants,  by  whom 
they  were  sure  to  be  attended,  found  it  an  easy  matter  to  rebel 
against  their  sovereign,  and  often  to  compel  him  to  accept 
terms  very  humiliating  to  royalty,  we  may  conclude^  that  si 


m2  LECTURES  ON 

subordination  pretty  similar  in  a  sovereignty  so  much  wider, 
could  not  have  subsisted  so  long  without  some  additional  and 
powerful  check.  This  was  the  more  necessary  in  the  present 
case,  because,  if  there  had  arisen  any  factions  or  discontents 
among  the  more  poctnt  eccles:asticks  against  their  spiritual 
lord,  the)-  would,  in  most  cases,  h  ve  had  the  assistance  of  the 
secular  powers  of  the  country,  who  in  spite  of  thtir  supersti- 
tion and  ignorance,  could  not  brook  the  reflection,  that  they 
were  tributary  to  a  foreign  power,  and  a  power  which  even 
claimed  a  sort  of  superintendency,  or  what  was  equivalent  to 
superintendency,  over  their  judicatures  and  senates.  1  he 
different  claims  set  up  by  Rome,  under  the  name  of  annats, 
tithes,  peterspence,  reservations,  resignations,  expectative 
graces,  beside  the  casualties  arising  from  pilgrimages,  jubilees, 
indulgences,  the  dues  of  appeals,  confirmations,  dispensations, 
investitures,  and  the  like,  were  so  many  sorts  of  tribute  ;  nor 
could  any  nation  which  paid  them  to  another,  be  said  to  be  in- 
dependent of  the  nation  to  which  they  were  paid,  or  to  possess 
sovereignty  within  itself.  The  right  of  appeals,  not  only  in  all 
cases  ecclesiastical,  but  in  most  cases  wherein  ecclesiasticks 
were  concerned,  the  many  clerical  privileges,  of  which  Rome 
pretended  to  be  both  the  guardian  and  the  judge,  laid  a  re- 
straint both  on  the  judiciary  powers,  and  on  the  legislative. 
No  wonder,  then,  that  in  the  different  states  of  Christendom, 
there  should  subsist,  in  the  civil  powers,  an  inextinguishable 
jealousy  of  Rome.  As  the  pretensions  of  the  latter  were  ex- 
orbitant, it  was  necessary  that  her  resources  for  supporting 
her  pretensions  should  be  powerful. 

Now  the  right  of  exemption  I  have  been  speaking  of,  prov- 
ed exactly  such  a  resource,  being  an  effectual  check  on  the  se- 
cular, or  established  clergy.  Accordingly,  when  in  the  coun- 
cil of  Trent,  an  attempt  was  made  by  some  bishops  to  have 
this  abuse,  as  they  accounted  it,  totally  removed,  the  pope's 
legates,  and  all  those  who  supported  papal  authority,  saw  but 
too  clearly  that  the  scheme  of  those  bishops,  if  they  were  grati- 
fied in  it,  would  undermine  the  hierarchy,  and  make,  as  they 
expressed  it,  every  bishop  a  pope  in  his  own  diocese  ;  for  when 
papal  exemptions  should  be  abrogated,  every  person  would  de- 
pend on  his  bishop,  and  none  immediately  on  the  pope,  the 
consequence  whereof  would  be,  that  people  would  soon  cease 
altogether  to  recur  to  Rome.  And  this  consequence  had, 
doubtless,  long  ago  taken  place,  had  not  the  monastick  orders 
come  very  opportunelv,  though,  in  some  respect,  accidentally, 
to  support  a  fabrick,  become  at  length  so  unwieldy,  as  to  ap- 
pear in  the  most  imminent  danger  of  falling  with  its  own 
Weight.     They  proved  as  so  many  buttresses   to  it,  which, 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  283 

though  originally  no  part  of  the  building,  added  amazingly  to 
its  strength. 

As  some  of  the  largest  and  loftiesi  trees  spring  from  very 
small  seeds,  so  the  most  extensive  and  wonderful  effects  some- 
times arise  from  very  inconsiderable  causes.  Of  the  truth 
of  this  remark,  we  have  a  striking  example  in  the  monasticfc 
order,  of  the  rise  and  progress  of  which  I  am  now  to  speak. 
In  times  of  persecution  in  the  church's  infancy,  whilst  the  hea- 
then yet  raged,  and  the  rulers  took  council  together  against 
the  Lord,  and  against  his  anointed,  many  pious  christians^ 
male  and  female,  married  and  unmarried,  justly  accounting, 
that  no  human  ft:licity  ought  to  come  in  competition  with  their 
fidelity  to  Christ,  and  modestly  distrustful  of  their  ability  to 
persevere  in  resisting  the  temptations  wherewith  they  were  in- 
cessantly harassed  by  their  persecutors,  took  the  resolution  to 
abandon  their  possessions  and  worldly  prospects,  and,  whilst 
the  storm  lasted,  to  retire  to  unfrequented  places,  far  from 
the  haunts  of  men,  the  married  with,  or  without  their  wives, 
as  they  agreed  between  them,  that  they  might  enjoy  in  quiet- 
ness their  faith  and  hope,  and  without  temptations  to  aposta- 
cy,  employ  themselves  principally  in  the  worship  and  service 
of  their  Maker.  The  cause  was  reasonable,  and  the  motive 
praise-worthy.  But  the  reasonableness  arose  solely  from  the 
circumstances.  When  the  latter  were  changed,  the  former 
vanished,  and  the  motive  could  no  longer  be  the  same.  When 
there  was  not  the  same  danger  in  society,  there  was  not  the 
same  occasion  to  seek  security  in  solitude.  Accordingly, 
when  the  affairs  of  the  church  were  put  upon  a  different  foot- 
ing, and  the  profession  of  Christianity  rendered  perfectly  safe, 
xnahy  returned  without  blame  from  their  retirement,  and  lived 
like  other  mefti.  Some,  indeed,  familiarized  by  time  to  a  so- 
litary and*  ascetick  life,  as  it  was  called,  at  length  preferred, 
through  habit,  what  they  had  originally  adopted  through  ne- 
cessity. They  did  not  waste  their  time  in  idleness  ;  they  sup- 
ported themselves  by  their  labour,  and  gave  the  surplus  in 
charity.  These  likewise,  without  blame,  remained  in  their 
retreat.  But  as  it  was  purely  to  avoid  temptation  and  danger 
that  men  first  took  refuge  in  such  recesses,  thev  never  thought 
of  fettering  themselves  by  vows  and  engagements,  because, 
by  so  doing,  they  must  have  exposed  their  souls  to  new  temp- 
tations, and  involved  them  in  more,  and  perhaps  greater  dan- 
gers, a  conduct  very  unlike  that  self-diffidence  which  certainly 
gave  rise  to  so  extraordinary  a  measure.  This,  therefore, 
was  not  monachism  in  the  acceptation,  which  the  word  came 
soon  afterwards  to  receive,  though,  most  probabl)',  it  sug- 


384  LECTURES  ON 

gested  the  idea  of  it,  and  may  justly  be  considered  as  the  first 
step  towards  it. 

Such  signal  sacrifices  have  a  lustre,  which  dazzles  the  eyes 
of  the  weak,  and  powerfully  engages  their  imitation.  The 
imitators,  regardless  of  the  circumstances  which  alone  can 
render  the  conduct  laudable,  are  often,  by  a  strange  depravity 
of  understanding,  led  to  consider  it  as  the  more  meritorious, 
the  less  it  is  reasonable,  and  the  more  eligible,  the  less  it  is 
useful.  Nay,  the  spirit  of  the  thing  comes  to  be  reversed. 
What  at  first,  through  humble  diffidence,  appeared  necessary 
for  avoiding  the  most  imminent  perils,  is,  through  presump- 
tion, voluntarily  adopted,  though  itself  a  source  of  perpetual 
peril.  This  I  call  monachism^  according  to  the  common  accep- 
tation of  the  term,  of  the  progress  of  which  I  propose  to  give 
some  account  in  the  sequel. 

Monachism,  one  of  the  most  natural  shoots  of  superstition, 
which,  viewing  the  Deity  as  an  object  of  terrour  rather  than  of 
love,  regards  it  as  the  surest  recommendation  to  his  favour,  that 
men  become  both  burdens  to  society,  and  torments  to  them- 
selves, and  which,  in  some  shape  or  other,  may  be  found  in 
all  religious,  was  not,  in  its  original  state,  even  in  the  chris- 
tian church,  considered  as  clerical ;  nor  were  the  monks,  as 
monks,  accounted  ecclesiasticks  of  any  order  or  denomination. 
They  were  no  other  than  people  who  had  bound  themselves  by 
a  vow  to  renounce  the  world,  to  live  in  poverty  and  chastity, 
to  confine  themselves  in  respect  of  meat,  and  drink,  and  ap- 
parel, to  what  appeared  merely  necessary,  and  to  devote  their 
time  to  prayer  and  penance,  reserving  a  small  portion  for 
works  of  industry.  This  way  of  life  was,  in  its  commence- 
ment, open  to  the  laity  of  all  conditions,  and  even  of  both 
sexes.  But  it  was  not  open  to  the  clergy,  whose  parochial 
duties  were  incompatible  with  such  a  seclusion  from  society. 
For  it  must  be  (ibserved,  that  they  had  not  then,  as  after- 
wards, any  clergy  merely  nominal,  or,  to  speak  more  proper- 
ly, clergymen,  who  were  no  ministers  of  religion,  having  no 
charge  or  office  in  the  church  of  Christ. 

This  engagement,  at  first,  led  many  unhappy  fanaticks  to 
fly  the  world  without  necessity,  to  pass  their  lives  in  solitude, 
in  remote  and  desert  places,  whence  they  were  called  hermits^ 
from  the  Greek  word  t^^f*a(;  signifying  desert,  and  monks,  from 
noixxoi  denoting  a  solitary,  from|i*«v«5  alone.  They  were  also 
named  anchorets,  from  eoctx.<i^pij]r,<i,  a  recluse.  Every  one  of  their 
ancient  names,  or  titles,  bears  some  vestige  of  this  most  dis- 
tinguishing trait  in  their  character,  their  secession  from  the 
world  and  society.  They  sheltered  themselves  accordingly  in 
some  rude  cell  or  cavern,  and  subsisted  on  herbs  and  roots. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  28S 

the  spontaneous  productions  of  the  soil,  covering  themselves 
with  the  skins  of  beasts,  for  defending  their  bodies  from  the 
inclemencies  of  the  weather. 

But  things  did  not  remain  long  in  this  state.  Give  but  time 
to  fanaticism,  and  its  fervours  will  subside.  It  was  soon 
found  convenient  to  relax  this  severity,  to  fail  on  a  method  of 
uniting  society  with  retirement,  property  with  indigence,  and 
abstinence  with  indulgence.  They  then  formed  communities 
of  men,  who  lived  together  in  houses,  called  monasteries  ; 
where  though  the  individuals  could  acquire  no  property  for 
themselves  individually,  there  was  no  bounds  to  the  acquisi- 
tions which  might  be  made  by  the  community.  The  female 
recluses  also  had  their  nunneries,  and  were  named  nuns.  The 
word  we  have  borrowed  from  the  French  nonne ;  its  etymolo- 
gy I  know  not.  Thus  people  fell,  at  length,  on  the  happy  ex- 
pedient of  reconciling  loud  pretences  to  sanctity  and  devotion, 
not  only  with  laziness  and  spiritual  pride,  but  with  the  most 
unbounded  and  shameless  avarice  ;  unbounded,  because  ap- 
parently in  behalf  of  a  publick  interest ;  and  shameless,  be- 
cause under  the  mask  of  religion.  And  if  they  excluded  some 
natural  and  innocent  gratifications,  the  exclusion,  as  might  be 
expected,  often  served  to  give  birth  to  unnatural  lusts.  Hard- 
ly, one  would  think,  can  an  imposition  be  too  gross  for  de- 
ceiving a  gross  and  superstitious  people.  So  much  was  the 
world  infatuated  by  the  sanctimonious  appearance  of  the  rcr 
cluses,  (which  consisted  chiefly  in  some  ridiculous  singularity 
of  garb)  that  men  thought  they  could  not  more  effectually 
purchase  heaven  to  themselves,  than  by  beggaring  their  off- 
spring, and  giving  all  they  had  to  erect  or  endow  monasteries/; 
that  is,  to  supply,  with  all  the  luxuries  of  life,  those  who 
were  bound  to  live  in  abstinence,  and  to  enrich  those  who  had 
solemnly  sworn,  that  they  would  be  for  ever  poor,  and  who 
professed  to  consider  riches  as  the  greatest  impediment  in  the 
road  to  heaven. 

Large  monasteries,  both  commodious  and  magnificent, 
more  resembling  the  palaces  of  princes  than  the  rude  cells 
which  the  primitive  monks  chose  for  their  abode,  were  erect- 
ed and  endowed.  Legacies  and  bequests,  from  time  to  time, 
flowed  in  upon  them.  Mistaken  piety  often  contributed  to  the 
evil ;  but  oftener  superstitious  profligacy.  Oppression  herself 
commonly  judged,  that  to  drvote  her  wealth  at  last,  when  it 
could  be  kept  no  longer,  to  a  religious  house,  was  a  full  atone- 
ment for  all  the  injustice  and  extortion  by  which  it  had  been 
amassed.  Bu-  what  can  set  in  a  stronger  light  the  pitiable 
brutishness,  to  which  the  people  were  reduced  by  the  reigning 
superstition,    when   men  of   rank   and  eminence,   who  had 


285  LECTURES  ON 

shown  no  partiality  to  any  thing  monastical,  during  their  lives, 
gave  express  orders,  when  in  the  immediate  views  of  death, 
that  their  friends  should  dress  them  out  in  monkish  vestments, 
that  in  ihese  thev^  might  die,  and  be  buried,  thinking,  that  the 
sanctity  of  their  garb  would  prove  a  protection  against  a  con- 
demnatory sentence  of  the  omniscient  judge.  It  is  lamentable, 
it  is  humiliating  to  think,  that  we  have  unquestionable  evi- 
dence, thac  human  nature  can  be  sunk  so  low.  The  igno- 
rance and  superstition  of  the  times,  by  degrees,  appropriated 
the  term  religious  to  those  houses  and  their  inhabitants. 

I  have  often  observed  to  you,  how  great  an  influence  names 
and  phrases  have  on  the  opinions  of  the  generality  of  mankind. 
I  should  have  remarked,  that  soon  after  things  were  put  upon 
this  footing,  it  was,  on  many  accounts,  judged  expedient,  that 
the  religious  should  be  in  orders.  For  the  absurdity  of  shep- 
herds without  a  flock,  pastors  without  a  charge,  was  an  absur- 
dity no  longer  ;  so  much  can  men  be  familiarized  by  custom  to 
use  words  with  any  latitude,  and  even  to  assign  a  meaning  to 
them  incompatible  with  their  primitive  use.  Accordingly  the 
companions  in  the  monastery  had  commonly  what  was  called 
priest's  orders,  and  were  termed  Jriari.,fratres^  brethren  ;  the 
head,  or  governour  of  the  house,  was  denominated  abbot,  from 
a  Svriack  word,  signifying  father.  Sometimes  he  was  only  a 
priest,  and  sometimes  had  episcopal  ordination.  Hence  the 
distinction  between  mitred  abbots  and  unmitred.  All  these, 
on  account  of  the  rules  to  which  they  were  bound  by  oath,  were 
styled  regular  clergy,  whereas  those  established  as  bishops  and 
priests  over  the  dioceses  and  parishes,  were  called  secular.  I 
know  that  some  distinction  is  also  made  between  monks  and 
friars.  Suffice  it  to  observe  at  present,  that  the  rules  of  the 
former  are  stricter  than  those  of  the  latter. 

When  spacious  monasteries  were  built,  and  supplied  with  A 
numerous  fraternity,  governed  by  an  abbot  of  eminence  and 
character,  there  often  arose  a  jealousy  between  the  abbot  and 
the  bishop,  in  whose  diocese  the  abbey  was  situated,  and  to 
whom,  as  things  stood  at  first,  the  abbot  and  the  friars  ovvetl 
spiritual  subjec  tion.  Out  of  their  mutual  jealousies  sprang 
umbrages,  and  these  sometimes  terminated  in  quarrels  and  in- 
juries. In  such  cases,  the  abbots  had  the  humiliating  disad- 
vantage, to  be  under  the  obligation  of  canonical  obedience  to 
him,  as  the  ordinary  of  the  place,  with  whom  they  were  at  va- 
riance. 

That  they  might  deliver  themselves  from  these  inconveni- 
ences, real  or  pretended,  and  might  be  independent  of  their 
rivals,  they  applied  to  Rome  one  after  another,  for  a  release 
from  this  slavery,  as  they  called  it,  by  being  taken  under  th« 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  28f 

protection  of  St.  Peter  ;  that  is,  under  immediate  subjection 
to  the  pope.  The  proposal  was,  with  avidity,  accepted  at 
Home.  That  politick  court  saw  immediately,  that  nothing 
could  be  better  calculated  for  supporting  papal  power.  Who- 
ever obtains  privileges  is  obliged,  in  order  to  secure  his  pri- 
vileges, to  maintain  the  authority  of  the  grantor- 
Very  quickly  all  the  monasteries,  great  and  small,  abbeys, 
priories,  and  nunneries,  were  exempted.  The  two  last  were 
inferiour  sorts  of  monasteries,  and  often  subordinate  to  some 
abbey.  Even  the  chapters  of  cathedrals,  consisting  mostly  of 
regulars,  on  the  like  pretexts,  obtained  exemption.  Finally, 
whole  orders,  those  called  the  congregations  of  Cluni  and  Cis- 
tertio,  Benedictines  and  others,  were  exempted.  This  effec- 
tually procured  a  prodigious  augmentation  to  the  pontifical  au- 
thority, which  now  came  to  have  a  sort  of  disciplined  troops  m 
every  place,  defended  and  protected  by  the  papacy,  who,  in  re- 
turn, were  its  defenders  and  protectors,  serving  as  spies  on 
the  bishops  as  well  as  on  the  secular  powers.  Afterwards  the 
mendicant  orders,  or  begging  friars,  though  the  refuse  of  the 
whole,  the  tail  of  the  beast,  as  Wickliff  termed  them,  whereof 
the  Roman  pontiff  is  the  head,  obtained  still  higher  privileges, 
for  they  were  not  only  exempted  every  where  from  episcopal 
authority,  but  had  also  a  title  to  build  churches  wherever  they 
pleased,  and  to  administer  the  sacraments  in  these  indepen- 
dently of  the  ordinary  of  the  place.  Nay,  afterwards,  in  the 
^t^imes  immediately  preceding  the  convention  of  the  aforesaid 
council,  things  had  proceeded  so  far,  that  any  private  clerk 
could,  at  a  small  expence,  obtain  an  exemption  from  the  super- 
intendency  of  his  bishop,  not  only  in  regard  to  correction,  but 
In  relation  to  orders,  which  he  might  receive  from  whomsoever 
he  pleased,  so  as  to  have  no  connexion  with  the  bishop  of  any 
Icind. 

jj.  What  had  made  matters  still  worse  was,  th*t  the  whole  bu- 
siness of  teaching  the  christian  people  had,  by  this  time,  fallen 
into  the  hands  of  the  regulars.  The  secular  clergy  had  long 
since  eased  themselves  of  the  burden.  Preaching  and  reading 
the  sacred  scriptures  properly,  made  no  part  of  the  publick  offi- 
ces of  religion.  It  is  true,  it  was  still  the  practice  to  read,  or 
rather  chant,  some  passages  from  the  gospels  and  epistles,  in 
an  unknown  tongue;  for  all  in  the  western  churches  must 
now,  for  the  sake  of  uniformity,  to  which  every  thing  was  sa- 
crificed, be  in  Latin.  Now,  for  some  centuries  before  the 
council  of  Trent,  Latin  had  not  been  the  native  language  of 
any  country  or  city  in  the  world,  not  even  of  Italy  or  of  Rome. 
That  such  lessons  were  not  understood  by  the  people,  was 
thought  an  objection  of  no  consequence  at  all.     They  were  not 


288  LECTURES  ON 

the  less  fitted  for  making  a  part  of  the  solemn,  unmeaning  mum- 
mery, of  the  liturgick  service.  The  bishops  and  priests  ha- 
ving long  disused  preaching,  probably  at  first  through  laziness, 
seem  to  have  been  considered  at  last  as  not  entitled  to  preach  ; 
for,  on  the  occasion  above-mentioned,  they  very  generally  com- 
plained, that  the  charge  of  teaching  was  taken  out  of  their 
hands,  and  devolved  upon  the  friars,  especially  the  mendicants, 
who  were  a  sort  of  itinerant  preachers,  licensed  by  the  court  of 
Rome. 

How  the  friars  discharged  this  trust,  we  may  learn  from  the 
most  authentick  histories,  which  sufiiciently  show,  that  the  re- 
|)resentations  of  the  scope  of  their  preaching,  made  by  the 
Bishops  in  that  council,  were  not  exaggerated,  when  they 
said,  that  the  end  of  their  teaching  was  not  to  edify  the  people, 
but  to  collect  alms  from  them,  either  for  themselves  or  for  their 
convents  ;  that  in  order  to  attain  this  purpose,  they  solely 
considered  not  what  was  for  the  soul's  health,  but  what  would 
please,  and  flatter,  and  sooth  the  appetites  of  the  hearers,  and 
thereby  bring  most  profit  to  themselves  ;  so  that  the  people, 
instead  of  learning  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  are  but  amused, 
said  they,  with  mere  novelties  and  vanities.  But  whatever  be 
in  this  account,  the  pope  could  not  fail  to  draw  an  immense  ad- 
vantage from  this  circumstance,  that  the  instruction  of  the  peo- 
ple was  now  almost  entirely  in  the  hands  of  his  own  creatures. 
How  great,  then,  must  be  the  advantage  of  a  similar  but  still 
more  important  kind,  resulting  from  the  exemptions  granted  to 
universities,  who  being  taken,  as  it  were,  under  his  immediate 
patronage,  were  engaged  from  interest  to  instil  principles  of 
obedience  to  the  pope  into  the  minds  of  the  youth,  of  whose 
education  they  had  the  care. 

Now  if  the  chain  of  dependence  of  the  secular  clergy  on 
the  head,  be  similar  to  that  which  subsists  in  a  civil,  particular- 
ly a  feudatory  constitution,  where  the  obligation  of  every  infe- 
riour  through  the  whole  subordination  of  vassallage  is  consi- 
dered as  being  much  stronger  to  the  immediate  superiour  than 
to  the  sovereign,  the  dependence  of  the  regulars  may  justly  be 
represented  by  the  military  connexion  which  subsists  with  the 
sovereign  in  a  standing  armv.  There  the  tie  of  every  soldier 
and  subaltern  is  much  stronger  to  the  king  than  to  his  captain 
or  his  colonel.  If,  then,  the  secular  clergy,  in  Romish  coun- 
tries, may  be  called  the  pope's  civil  officers,  the  regulars  are 
his  guarde.  This  matter  was  too  well  understood  by  the  friends 
of  Rome,  who  were  the  predominant  party  in  the  council  of 
Trent,  ever  to  yield  to  anv  alteration  here  that  could  be  called 
material.  Some  trifling  changes,  however,  were  made,  in  or- 
der to  conciliate  those  who  were  the  keenest  advocates  for  re- 


feCCLl&SIASTlCAL  HISTORY.  2fi& 

forming  the  discipline  of  the  church,  or  at  least  to  silence  their 
clamours.  The  exemptions  given  to  chapters  were  limited  a 
little.  The  bishops  were  made  governours  of  the  nunneries 
within  their  bishopricks,  not  as  bishops  of  the  diocese,  but  as 
the  pope's  delegates  ;  and  friars,  who  resided  in  cloisters,  and 
were  guilty  of  any  scandalous  excess  without  the  precincts  of 
the  cloister,  if  the  supefiour  of  the  convent,  whether  abbot  or 
prior,  refused,  when  required,  to  chastise  them  within  a  limi- 
ted time,  might  be  punished  by  the  bishop. 

I  have  now  traced  the  principal  causes,  which  co-operat- 
ed to  the  erection  of  the  hierarch\ ,  and  shall,  in  what  remains 
to  be  observed  on  the  subject,  in  a  few  more  lectures,  consider 
both  the  actual  state  of  church  power,  and  the  different  opinions 
concerning  it  at  the  time  of  the  council  of  Trent,  which  shall 
terminate  our  inquiries  into  the  rise  and  establishment  of  the 
J^ierarchy-i 


J90  L.ECTURES  ON 


LECTURE  XX. 


J,  Have  now,  in  a  course  of  lectures,  endeavoured,  with  all 
possible  brevity,  to  lay  before  you  the  principal  arts,  by  which 
the  Roman  hierarchy  was  raised,  and  have  also  pointed  out 
some  of  the  most  remarkable  events  and  occurrences,  which 
facilitated  the  erection.  It  is  chiefly  the  progress  of  ecclesi- 
astical dominion,  that  I  have  traced.  The  papal  usurpation 
on  the  secular  powers,  though  I  have  explained  its  source  in 
the  erection  of  episcopal  tribunals,  and  glanced  occasionally  at 
its  progress,  I  have,  for  several  reasons,  not  so  expressly  ex- 
amined. One  is,  it  does  not  so  immediately  affect  the  subject 
of  the  hierarchy,  with  which  I  considered  myself  as  princ-pally 
concerned.  Another  is,  that  the  usurpation  here  is,  if  possi- 
ble, still  more  glaring  to  every  attentive  reader  of  church  his- 
tory, and  therefore  stands  less  in  need  of  being  pointed  out. 
A  third  reason  is,  that  though  the  claims  of  superiority  over 
the  civil  powers,  formerly  advanced  by  Rome  with  wonderful 
success,  have  never  been  abandoned,  but  are,  as  it  were,  re- 
served in  petto  for  a  proper  occasion,  yet,  at  present,  the  most 
sublime  of  their  pretensions  are  little  minded,  and  are  hardly, 
as  affairs  now  stand  in  Europe,  capable  of  doing  hurt.  No- 
thing can  be  better  founded  than  the  remark,  that  the  thunders 
of  the  Vatican  will  kindle  no  conflagration,  except  where 
there  are  combustible  materials.  At  present  there  is  hardly  a 
country  in  Christendom  so  barbarously  superstitious  (I  do  not 
except  even  Spain  and  Portugal)  as  to  afford  a  sufficient  quan- 
tity of  those  materials  for  raising  a  combustion.  We  nevef 
hear  now  of  the  excommunication  and  deposition  of  princes, 
of  kingdoms  laid  under  an  interdict,  and  of  the  erection  and 
the  disposal  of  kingdoms  by  the  pope.  Such  is  the  difference 
of  times,  that  these  things,  which  were  once  the  great  engines 
of  raising  papal  dominion,  would  now  serve  only  to  render  it 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  291 

contemptible.  The  foundation  of  all  is  opinion,  which  is  of 
great ^nsequence  in  every  polity,  but  is  every  thing  in  an 
ecclesrastick  polity.  To  the  above  reasons,  I  shail  add  a 
fourth.  It  is  only  a  part,  and  not  the  greater  part  neither,  of 
the  Roman  Catholicks,  who  acknowledge  that  the  pope,  as 
pope,  or  bishop,  has  any  kind  of  authority  in  secular  matters 
over  the  civil  powers.  They  make  but  a  party  comparatively 
small,  who  carry  the  rights  of  the  papacy  so  far  as  to  include 
therein  a  paramount  authority  over  all  the  powers  of  this 
earth,  spiritual  and  temporal.  A  gentleman  of  the  house  of 
commons,  in  a  celebrated  speech  on  the  affairs  of  America, 
in  the  beginning  of  the  American  revolt,  speaking  of  the  re- 
ligious profession  of  those  colonies,  denominated  it  the  pro- 
testantism of  the  protestant  religion.  In  imitation  of  the 
manner  of  this  orator,  I  shall  style  the  system  of  that  high- 
flying party  in  the  church  of  Rome,  the  popery  of  the  popish 
religion.  It  is  the  very  quintessence  of  papistry.  Nay,  we 
have  some  foundation  even  from  themselves  for  naming  it 
so;  for  those  who  hold  it  are,  even  among  Roman  Catholicks, 
distinguished  by  the  name  pontificii^  or  papists^  and  mostly 
consist  of  the  people  and  clergy  of  Italy,  the  immediate  de- 
pendencies on  the  papal  see,  and  the  different  orders  of  regu- 
lars. It  was  in  a  particular  manner  the  system  strenuously 
supported  by  the  order  of  Jesuits  now  abolished.  The  doc- 
trine of  the  more  moderate  Roman  Catholicks,  which  is  that 
of  almost  all  the  laity,  and  the  bulk  of  the  secular  clergy  in  all 
European  countries,  except  Italy  and  its  islands,  is  unfavour- 
able to  those  high  pretensions  of  the  Roman  pontiff.  But 
even  these  are  far  from  being  entirely  unanimously  in  regard  to 
the  spiritual  power  and  jurisdiction,  which  they  ascribe  to 
him.  The  bounding  line,  which  distinguishes  the  civil  from 
the  ecclesiastick,  is  one  of  the  arcana  of  that  church's  policy, 
and  therefore  never  to  be  precisely  ascertained.  I  shall  then, 
in  order  to  give  you  some  idea  ere  I  conclude,  of  the  subli- 
mity and  plenitude  of  the  ecclesiastick  power,  claimed  in 
behalf  of  his  holiness  over  the  ministers  of  the  church,  by  the 
advocates  of  that  see,  and  to  give  you  some  notion  of  their 
.manner  of  supporting  those  claims,  exhibit  to  you  the  sub- 
stance of  a  speech  on  episcopal  jurisdiction,  delivered  in  the 
council  of  Trent,  by  father  Lainez,  general  of  the  Jesuits, 
translated  from  the  Italian  of  Fra  Paolo  Sarpi.  Afterwards 
I  shall  take  a  little  notice  of  the  encroachments  made  on  the 
civil  powers. 

"  Lainez,"  says  that  historian,  "  spoke  more  than  two  hours 
,  *'  with  great  vehemence,  in  a  distinct  but  magisterial  tone. 
^^  The  argument  of  his  discourse  consisted  of  two  parts.   The 


29a  I.ECTURESON 

**  first  was  employed  in  proving,  that  the  right  of  jurisdiction 
**  over  Christ's  kingdom  here  had  been  gi^  en  entirely^  the 
**  Roman  pontiff,  and  not  a  single  particle  of  it  to  an^)th€r 
"in  the  church.  The  second  contained  his  answers  to  all 
*'  the  arguments  on  the  opposite  side,  adduced  in  former 
<*  meetings. 

*'  The  substance  was,  that  there  is  a  great  difference,  nay, 
**  a  contrariety  between  the  church  of  Christ  and  civil  com- 
*'  munities,  inasmuch  as  these  have  an  existence  previous  to 
"the  formation  of  their  government,  and  are  thereby  free, 
*' having  in  them  originally,  as  in  its  fountain,  all  the  jurisdic- 
'>  tion,  which,  without  divesting  themselves  of  it,  they  com* 
*'  municate  to  magistrates.  But  the  church  did  neither  make 
"  herself,  nor  form  her  own  government.  It  was  Christ  the 
"  prince  and  monarch  who  first  established  the  laws  whereby 
**  she  should  be  governed  ;  then  assembled  his  people,  and, 
"  as  scripture  expresses  it,  built  the  church.  Thus  she  is 
"  born  a  slave,  without  any  sort  of  liberty,  power,  or  jurisdic- 
*'  tion,  but  every  where,  and  in  every  thing,  subjected.  la 
*'  proof  of  this  he  quoted  passages  of  scripture,  wherein  the 
*^  gathering  of  the  church  is  compared  to  the  sowing  of  a 
*'  field,  the  drawing  of  a  net  to  land,  and  the  rearing  of  aa 
"  edifice  ;  adding,  that  Christ  is  said  to  have  come  into  the 
**  world  to  assemble  his  faithful  people,  to  gather  his  sheep^ 
•'  to  instruct  them  both  by  doctrine  and  by  example.  Then 
*'  he  subjoined :  the  first  and  principal  foundation  whereon 
*'  Christ  built  the  church,  was  Peter  and  his  succession,  ac. 
"  cording  to  the  word  which  he  said  to  him,  Thou  art  PeteTy 
*'  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church;  which  rock  though 
*'  some  of  the  fathers  have  understood,  to  he  Christ  himself, 
<*  and  others  the  faith  in  him,  or  the  confession  of  the  faith, 
"  it  is  nevertheless  a  more  catholick  exposition  to  understand 
*^  it  of  Peter  himself,  who,  in  ffebrew  or  Svriack,  is  called 
"  Cephas^  that  is.  Rock,  tie  affirmed,  in  like  manner,  that 
*t  whih"  Christ  lived  in  mortal  flesh,  he  governed  the  church 
"  with  despotick  and  monarchical  government,  and  leaving  this 
**  earth,  he  left  the  same  form,  constituting  St~  Peter,  and  the 
♦'  successours  of  St.  Peter,  his  vicars  successively,  to  adml- 
"  nister  it,  as  it  had  been  exercised  by  him,  giving  them 
«»  r'en^r^'  power  and  jurisdiction,  and  subjecting  to  them  the 
**  church  in  the  way  wherein  it  is  subjected  to  him.  This  he 
**  proved  from  what  we  are  told  of  Peter,  because  to  him  alone 
^'  were  given  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  by  conse- 
**  q>;ence,  power  to  admit  and  exclude,  which  is  jurisdictic^n  ; 
*'  and  to  him  alone  it  was  said,  Feed,  that  is,  rule  my  sheep j 
^*  silly  aoimals,  which  have  no  part,  no  choice  whatever  in 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  293 

^*  conducting  themselves.  These  two  things,  namely,  to  be 
"  porMtatand  pastor,  being  perpetual  offices,  it  was  necessary 
"  thac^ey  should  be  conferred  on  a  perpetual  person,  that  is, 
"  not  on  the  first  only,  but  on  the  v/hole  succession.  Hence  the 
"  Roman  pontiff,  beginning  from  St.  Peter  to  the  end  of  the 
"  world,  is  true  and  absolute  despot  with  plenary  power  and 
"jurisdiction  ;  and  the  church  is  subject  to  him  as  it  was  to 
*'  Christ.  And  as  when  his  divine  majesty  governed  it,  it 
**  could  not  be  said,  that  any  of  the  faithful  had  the  smallest 
♦'  power  or  jurisdiction,  all  being  in  total  subjection,  the  samC 
"  mav  be  said  in  all  perpetuity.  Thus  we  ought  to  under- 
**  stand  these  declarations,  that  the  church  is  a  sheepfold, 
"  that  it  is  a  kingdom,  and  what  St.  Cyprian  says,  that  the 
"  episcopate  is  one,  and  that  a  part  thereof  is  held  by  every 
"  bishop  ;  that  is,  that  the  whole  undivided  power  is  placed 
"  in  one  single  pastor,  who  apportions  and  communicates  it  to 
*'  associates  in  the  ministrv  as  exigencies  require  ;  and  that, 
♦"^  in  allusion  to  this  St.  Cyprian  compares  the  apostolick  see  to 
*'  the  root,  the  head,  the  fountain,  the  sun  ;  showing,  by  these 
"  comparisons,  that  the  jurisdiction  is  essentially  in  her  alone; 
^  in  others,  only  by  derivation  or  participation.  And  this  is 
"the  meaning  of  that  most  usual  expression  of  antiquity,  that 
*'  Peter  and  the  pontiff  possess  the  plenitude  of  power,  others 
*'  do  but  participate  in  the  cure.  And  that  he  is  the  sole  shep- 
*'  herd,  is  demonstrated  by  the  words  of  Christ,  who  said, 
"  that  he  had  other  sheep,  which  he  would  gather,  that  there 
*'  might  be  but  one  sheepfold,  and  one  shepherd.  The  shep- 
*'  herd  spoken  of  here  cannot  be  Christ  himself,  because  it 
*'  could  not  be  said,  in  the  future  tense,  that  there  shall  be  one 
"  shepherd,  he  being  already  the  shepherd.  It  must,  there- 
**  fore,  be  understood  of  another  sole  shepherd,  to  be  consti- 
*'  tuted  after  him,  who  can  be  no  other  than  Peter  with  his 
"  succession.  He  rem;irked  here,  that  the  precept  to  feed 
"  the  fiock,  occurs  but  twice  in  scripture,  once  in  the  singular 
*^  number,  when  Christ  said  to  Peter,  Feed  my  sheep  ;  once  in 
"  the  plural,  when  Peter  said  to  others.  Feed  the ^och  a-i.signed 
'"'•  to  you.  Now  if  the  bishops  had  received  any  jurisdiction 
"  from  Christ,  it  would  be  equcd  in  them  all,  which  would 
*'  destroy  the  difference  betv/cen  patriarch,  archbishop,  and 
«  bishop  ;  besides,  the  pope  could  not  intermeddle  with  that 
"  authority,  either  by  diminishing  it,  or  b)  removing  it  en- 
*'  tirely,  as  he  cannot  intermeddle  with  the  power  of  orders 
*' which  is  from  God.  Wherefore  the  greatest  caution  is 
"  necessary  here,  lest  by  making  the  institution  of  bishops  de 
''''.jure  divino^  they  should  subvert  the  hierarchy,  and  introduce 
"  into  the  church  an  oligarchy,  or  rather  an  anarchy.     He 


^94  LECTURES  OlSr 

*'  added,  To  the  end  that  Peter  might  govern  the  church 
*'  well,  so  that  the  gates  of  hell  should  not  prevail  agaij|t  her, 
"  Christ,  a  little  before  his  death,  prayed  efficacious^  that 
**  his  faith  might  not  fail,  and  ordained  him  to  confirm  the 
*'  brethren  ;  in  other  words,  he  gave  him  the  privilege  of 
*'  infallibility,  in  judging  of  faith,  manners,  and  the  whole  of 
"  rehgion,  obliging  all  the  church  to  obey  him,  and  stand  firm 
"  in  whatsoever  should  be  decreed  by  him.  He  concluded, 
"  that  this  is  the  true  foundation  of  the  christian  doctrine, 
"  and  the  rock  whereon  the  church  is  built.  He  proceeded 
"  to  censure  those  who  hold  that  bishops  have  received  any 
*'  power  from  Christ,  an  opinion  subversive  of  the  privilege  of 
**  the  Roman  church,  whose  pontiff  is  head  of  the  church  uni- 
**  versal,  and  the  only  vicar  of  Christ  upon  earth.  It  is  very 
"  well  known,  that  by  the  ancient  canon,  omnes  sive  patriarchce^ 
**  &c.  it  is  enacted,  that  whoever  takes  away  the  rights  of  other 
"churches,  commits  injustice,  but  whoever  takes  away  the 
•'  privileges  of  the  Roman  church,  is  a  heretick.  He  added, 
"  that  it  is  an  absolute  contradiction  to  maintain,  that  the  pon- 
*'  tiff  is  head  of  the  church,  and  its  government  is  monarchi- 
'*  cal,  and  to  affirm,  that  there  is  either  power  or  authority  in 
*'  it,  which  is  received  from  others,  and  not  derived  from 
"  him. 

*'  In  refuting  the  arguments,  on  the  opposite  side,  he  ad- 
"  vanced,  that,  according  to  the  order  instituted  by  Christ,  the 
**  apostles  must  have  been  ordained  bishops,  not  by  Christ,  but 
*'  by  Peter,  receiving  jurisdiction  from  him  alone  ;  an  opi- 
"  nion,  he  said,  extremely  probable,  and  held  by  many  catho- 
♦'  lick  doctors.  Others  however,  who  maintain  that  the  apos- 
*'  ties  were  ordained  bishops  by  Christ,  add  that  his  divine  ma- 
"  jesty ,  in  so  doing,  exercised,  by  prevention,  Peter's  office,  doing 
*'  for  once  what  belonged  to  Peter  to  do,  giving  to  the  apostles 
*'  himself  that  power  which  they  ought  to  have  received  from 
"  Peter,  just  as  God  took  of  the  spirit  of  Moses,  and  imparted 
"  it  to  the  seventy  judges,  so  that  it  was  as  much  as  if  they 
*'  had  been  ordained  by  Peter,  and  had  received  all  authority 
.*'  from  him  ;  and  therefore  they  continued  subject  to  Peter, 
"  in  regard  to  the  places  and  modes  of  exercising  their  autho- 
"  rity.  And  though  we  do  not  read  that  Peter  corrected 
*'  them,  it  was  not  through  defect  of  power,  but  because  they 
.*'  exercised  their  office  properly,  and  so  did  not  need  correction. 
*'  Whoever  reads  the  celebrated  canon,  Ita  Dominus^  will  be 
"  assured,  that  every  catholick  ought  to  believe  this  ;  and  thus 
"  the  bishops,  who  are  successours  of  the  apostles,  receive  the 
"  whole  from  the  successour  of  Peter.  He  observed,  also, 
"  that  the  bishops  are  not  called  successours  of  the  apostles, 


ECCLESIASTICAL   HISTORY.  295 

^  unless,  as  being  in  their  places,  in  the  way  that  a  bishop  suc- 
"  ceedllhis  predecessors,  and  not  as  being  ordained  by  them. 
**  He  replied  to  what  some  had  inferred,  that  the  pope  might 
"  then  leave  off  making  bishops,  choosing  to  be  the  only  bi- 
"  shop  himself.     He  admitted  that  ordination  is  divine,  that 
**  in  the  church  there  is  a  multitude  of  bishops,  coadjutors  of 
*'  the  pontiff,  and  therefore  that  the  pontiff  is  obliged  to  pre- 
*'  serve  the  order,   but  that  there  is  a  great  difference  between 
*'  saying  that  a  thing  is  de  jure  divino^  and  that  it  is  appointed 
"  of  God.     Things  instituted  dejure  divino^  are  perpetual,  and 
"  depend  on  God,  alone,  at  every  time,  both  universally  and 
**  particularly.     Thus  baptism,  and  all  the  other  sacrau.ents, 
"  wherein  God  operates  singularly  in  each  particular,  are  de 
'•^  jure  divino.     Thus  the  Roman  pontiff  is  of  God.     For  when 
^*  one  dies,  the  keys  do  not  remain  with  the  church,  for  they 
"were  not  given  to  her.     Bui  when  the  new  pope  is  created, 
"  God  immediately  gives  them  to  him.     But  it  happens  other- 
"  wise  in  things  barely  of  divine  appointment ;  inasmuch  as 
*'  from  God  comes  only  the  universal,  whereas  the  particulars 
*'  are  executed  by  men.     Thus  St.  Paul  says,  that  princes  and 
^'  temporal  powers  are  ordained  of  God  ;  that  is,    from  him. 
"alone   comes  the   universal   precept,   that  there  should  be 
'♦  princes  ;  nevertheless,  the  particulars  are  made  by  civil  laws. 
'^  In  the  same  manner  bishops  are  ordained  of  God  ;    and  St. 
"  Paul  says  they  are  placed  by  the  Holy  Ghost  for  the  govern- 
**  ment  of  the  church,  but  not  de  jure  divino.     The  pope,  how- 
**  ever,  cannot  abolish  the  universal  precept  for  making  bi- 
*'  shops  in  the  church,  because  it  is  from  God  ;  but  each  par- 
**  t.icular  bishop,  being  only  dejure  canonico^  may,  by  pontifical 
"  authority,  be  removed.     And  to  the  objection   made,  that 
*'  the  bishops  would  be  delegates,   and  not  ordinaries,  he  an- 
*'  swered  :  It  behoveth  us  to  distinguish  jurisdiction  into  fun- 
**  damental  and  derived,  and  the  derived  into  delegated  and 
"  ordinary.     In  civil  polities,  the  fundamental  is  in  the  prince, 
'"  the  derived  is  in  all  the  magistrates.     And  in  these,  ordina-^ 
*'  ries  are  different  from  delegates,  because  they  receive  the 
**  authority  diversly,  though  they  all  derive  equally  from   the 
•*  same  sovereignty  ;   but  the  difference  consists  in  this,   that 
**  the  ordinaries  are  by  perpetual  laws,  and  with  succession : 
**  the  others  have  singular  authority  either  personal  or  casual. 
**  The  bishops,  therefore,  are  ordinaries,  being  instituted,  by 
"  pontifical   laws,    dignities   of    perpetual   succession    in   the 
^^  church.     He   added,  that  those  passages,    wherein   Christ 
"  seems  to  give  authority  to  the  church,  as  that  wherein  he 
"  says,  that  it  is  the  pillar  and  basis  of  the  truth^  and  that  other, 
^*  Let  him  xvho  tvill  n9t  hetur  the  church  be  to  thee  as  a  heathen  mid 


zm  .    LECTURES  ON 

*'  a  publican^  are  all  to  be  understood  solely  in  respect  of  \H 
*'  head,  which  is  the  pope.  For  this  reason  the  church  is  in^ 
*'  fallible,  because  it  ihas  an  infallible  head.  And  thus  he  is 
"  separated  from  the  church  who  is  separated  from  the  pope, 
"  its  head.  As  to  what  had  been  urged,  that  the  council  could 
"  have  no  authority  from  Christ,  if  none  of  the  bishops  had 
"  any,  he  answered,  that  this  was  not  to  be  regarded  as  an  ob- 
*' jection,  bat  as  a  certain  truth,  being  a  very  clear  and  neces- 
"  sary  consequence  of  the  truly  catholick  doctrine  he  had 
"  demonstrated  ;  nay,  added  he,  if  each  of  the  bishops  in  coun- 
"  cil  be  fallible,  it  cannot  be  denied,  that  all  of  them  together* 
"  are  fallible  ;  and  if  the  authority  of  the  council  arose  from  the 
"  authority  of  the  bishops,  no  council  could  ever  be  called  ge- 
*•'-  neral,  wherein  the  number  of  those  present  is  incomparably 
"  less  than  the  number  of  those  that  are  absent.  He  mention- 
"  ed,  that  in  that  very  council,  under  Paul  the  third,  the  most 
"  momentous  articles  concerning  the  canonical  books,  the  au- 
<*  thority  of  translations,  the  equality  of  tradition  to  scripture, 
*'  had  been  decided  by  a  number  less  than  fifty :  that  if  multi- 
*'  tude  gave  authority,  these  decisions  had  none  at  all.  But 
"  as  a  number  of  prelates,  convened  by  the  pontiiF,  for  the  pur- 
'*  pose  of  constituting  a  general  council,  however  few,  derives 
*'  not  the  name  and  efficacy  of  being  general  from  any  other 
*'  cause  than  the  pope's  designation,  so  likewise  he  is  the  sole 
"  source  of  its  authority.  Therefore,  if  it  issue  precepts,  or 
"  anathemas,  these  have  no  effect,  unless  in  virtue  of  the  pon* 
^*  tiff's  future  confirmation.  Nor  can  the  council  bind  any  by 
<*  its  anathemas,  further  than  they  shall  be  enforced  by  the  con- 
**  firmation.  And  when  the  synod  says,  that  it  is  assembled 
«'  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  means  no  more  than  that  the  fathers 
"  are  assembled,  by  the  pope's  summons,  to  discuss  matters, 
"  which,  when  approved  by  him,  will  be  decreed  by  the  Holy 
"  Ghost.  Otherwise,  how  could  it  be  said,  that  a  decree  is 
*'  made  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  may,  by  pontifical  authority^ 
*'  be  invalidated,  or  has  need  of  further  confirmation  :  and 
"  therefore,  in  councils,  however  numerous,  when  the  pope  is 
*'  present,  he  alone  decrees,  nor  does  the  council  add  any  thing 
*'  but  its  approbation  ;  that  is,  it  receives.  Accordingly,  the 
"  authentick  phrase  has  always  been,  Sacro  approbante  concilio  ; 
*^  nay,  in  determinations  of  the  greatest  weight,  as  was  the  de- 
*'  position  of  the  emperour  Frederick  the  second,  in  the  gene- 
"  ral  council  of  Lvons,  Innocent  the  fourth,  a  most  wise  pontiff, 
♦^refused  the  approbation  of  the  synod,  lest  any  should  ima- 
**;gine  it  necessarv  :  he  thought  it  enough  to  say,  sacro  presente 
*'  conciiw.  Nor  ought  we  .hc;nce  to  conrhide,  that  a  coiincil  i& 
"superfluous.     It  is  convened  for  the  sake  of  stricter  inquisi- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY. 

•"^^  lion,  easier  persuasion,  and  for  giving  the  members  some 
*'  notion  oi"  the  question.  And  when  it  judges,  it  acts  by  vir- 
"  tue  of  the  pontifical  authority,  derived  from  the  divine,  given 
*■'-  it  by  the  pope.  For  these  reasons,  the  good  doctors  have 
"  subjected  the  authority  of  the  council  to  the  authority  of  the 
*'  pontiff,  as  totally  dependent  thereon.  Without  this,  it  has 
"  neither  the  assistance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  nor  infallibility, 
*'  nor  the  power  of  binding  the  church.  It  has  nothing  but 
"  what  is  conceded  to  it  by  him  alone,  to  whom  Christ  said, 
*'  Feed  viy  sheep.'''' 

Such  was  the  famous  discourse  of  Lainez,  in  which  I  must 
own,  we  have  much  greater  reason  to  admire  Jesuitical  im- 
pudence than  even  Jesuitical  sophistry.  So  many  bold  asser- 
tions, some  of  which  are  flatly  contradicted  bj'  sacred  writ, 
and  others  by  the  most  unquestionable  records  of  history, 
required  a  man  of  no  common  spirit,  or,  as  scripture  strongly 
expresses  it,  who  had  a  brow  of  brass,  to  advance  them.  Is 
it  possible,  that  he  himself  was  so  ignorant  as  to  believe  what 
he  advanced  ?  Or  could  he  presume  so  far  upon  the  ignorance 
of  his  audience,  as  to  think  of  making  them  believe  it  ?  Of 
did  he  imagine  that  his  hearers  would  be  so  overborne  by  his 
eloquence,  his  assuming  tone  and  dictatorial  manner,  as  to  be 
thrown  into  a  kind  of  stupor,  and  rendered  incapable  of  dis- 
covering the  notorious  falsehoods  with  which  his  oration  was 
stuffed  ?  Passing  the  contradictions  to  holy  writ,  a  book  with 
which  the  divines  of  his  clay  were  but  beginning  to  be  ac- 
quainted, was  it  prudent  to  ascribe  a  power  to  the  papacy  tiot 
only  unheard  of  in  former  ages,  but  which  popes  themselves 
had  explicity  disclaimed  ?  Nothing  can  be  more  express  than 
the  words  of  Gregory,  surnamed  the  great,  who,  though  re- 
markably tenacious  of  the  honours  of  his  see,  says,  in  arguing 
against  the  Constantinopolitan  patriarch,  for  assuming  the  ti- 
tle of  universal  bishop,  "  Si  unus  episcopus  vocatur  universa- 
*''  Hs,  universa  ecclesia  corruit,  si  unus  universus  cadet."  If 
one  should  fall,  the  universal  church  falls  with  him.  Here, 
taking  it  for  self-evident,  that  all  bishops,  without  exception, 
are  fallible,  he  infers  the  absurdity  there  is  in  any  one  calling 
himself  universal.  Again,  "  Absit  a  cordibus  christianorum 
*'  nomen  istud  blasphemise,  in  quo  omnium  sacerdotum  honor 
"  adimitur,  dum  ab  uno  sibi  dementer  arrogatur  ;"  where  he 
no  less  plainly  arraigns  the  impious  usurpation  of  any  one, 
who,  by  claiming  such  a  superiority,  would  strip  all  other 
priests  of  their  dignity,  and  madly  arrogate  the  whole  to 
himself.  Was  it  well-judged  to  misrepresent  so  common  an 
author  as  Cyprian  in  so  flagrant  a  manner,  and  make  him  com- 
pare the  apostolicfc  (that  is^,  in  the  Jesuit's  dialect,  the  Roman) 


298  LECTURES  ON 

see  to  the  root,  the  head,  the  fountain,  the  sun,  in  a  passage 
where  Cyprian  mentions  no  see  whatever,  but  speaks  solely  of 
the  necessity  of  union  with  the  universal  church  ?  Cyprian,  in 
wi'iting  to  popes,  and  of  them,  uniformly  shows,  that  he 
considered  them  as,  in  respect  of  their  ministry,  entirely  on 
a  foot  of  equality  with  himself,  denominating  them  brethren, 
colleagues,  and  fellow-bishops.  Whether  he  paid  an  implicit 
deference  to  their  judgment,  let  the  dispute  he  had  with  pope 
Stephen,  about  the  rebaptization  of  those  who  had  been  bap- 
tized by  hereticks,  testify.  By  this  firmness,  he  incurred  ex- 
communication from  the  pope  ;  and,  in  this  state,  he  died, 
though  now  worshipped  as  a  saint  and  a  martyr  by  the  very 
church  which  excommunicated  him. 

But  not  to  enter  farther  into  particulars,  was  it  judicious  in 
Lainez,  to  trust  so  much  to  the  ignorance  of  the  whole  assem- 
bly, as  not  only  to  quote  such  men  as  Cyprian,  an  eminent  and 
inflexible  opposer  of  papal  arrogance,  but  to  talk  of  the 
pope's  power  in  convoking  councils,  and  confirming  their  de- 
crees, as  what  had  always  obtained  in  the  church,  and  was  es- 
sential to  the  very  being  of  a  council,  when  every  smatterer  in 
ecclesiastick  history,  and  in  ancient  ecclesiastick  writers, 
must  have  known,  that  this  practice  was  comparatively  recent? 
Passing  the  custom  of  the  earlier,  ages,  when  the  imperial 
authority  was  used,  was  it  already  quite  forgotten,  that  in  the 
very  preceding  century,  the  council  of  Pisa  was  not  convened 
by  any  pontiff,  and  yet  proceeded  so  far  as  to  try  and  depose 
two  pretenders  to  the  popedom,  and  elect  a  third  in  their 
stead  ?  Or,  had  they  now  no  knowledge  of  the  council  of 
Constance,  which  was  still  later,  and,  in  like  manner,  depos- 
ed two  claimants,  one  of  them  the  pope,  who  had  convoked 
it,  and,  after  accepting  the  resignation  of  a  third,  proceeded 
to  the  election  of  a  fourth  ?  Or  coidd  it  be  imagined,  that  the 
whole  audience  was  so  stupid,  as  not  to  be  sensible,  that,  if 
those  proceedings  at  Constance  were  null,  there  was  no  va- 
cancy made  by  the  deposition  of  John  and  Benedict,  conse- 
quently that  the  council's  election  of  Martin,  following  there- 
on, was  null,  consequently  that  Pius  the  fourth,  the  pope  then 
reigning,  had  no  right,  as  he  derived  his  title  lineally  from  an 
usurper,  who,  by  creating  cardinals  whilst  he  himself  was 
destitute  of  authority,  had  perpetuated,  in  his  succcssours, 
the  failure  of  his  own  title,  and  consequently,  that  there  was 
an  irreparable  breach  made  in  the  succession  to  the  popedom? 
Was  it  possible,  that  they  should  not  perceive,  that  the  sub- 
versioxi  of  the  authority  of  that  council,  an  authority  claimed 
over  popes,  was  the  subversion  of  the  title  of  Martin  the  fifth, 
and  that  the  subversion  of  the  title  of  Martin  the  fifth,  was 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  299 

tlie  subversion  of  the  title  of  all  succeeding  popes  to  the  end 
of  the  world  ? 

How  curiously  does  Lainez  argue  from  the  metaphor  of 
sheep^  that  the  christian  people,  indeed  the  whole  church, 
clergy  as  well  as  laity,  (the  pope,  the  one  shepherd  of  the  one 
sheepfold,  alone  excepted)  have  no  more  judgment  in  directing 
themselves  than  brute  beasts.  He  does  not,  indeed,  so  cle- 
verly account  how  that  superiour  sort  of  being,  the  pope,  can 
think  of  choosing  any  of  these  irrational  animals,  as  partners 
in  the  ministry  with  him,  to  assist  in  guiding  and  directing 
their  fellow-brutes.  I  admire  the  wonderful  fetch  by  which 
he  makes  Jesus  Christ,  when  he  commissioned  the  twelve  apos- 
tles, act  in  ordaining  eleven  of  them,  (though  no  distinction 
is  pointed  out  in  the  history)  merely  in  the  name  of  Peter, 
and  as  Peter's  substitute  ;  borrowing  back,  for  this  purpose, 
part  of  the  authority  exclusively  conferred  on  him.  He  is, 
indeed,  greatly  at  a  loss  (these  deputy-apostles,  or  apostles 
of  the  apostle  Peter,  unluckily  behaved  so  propeily)  to  find  an 
instance  of  Peter's  so  much  boasted  authority  in  judging  and 
correcting  them.  But  we  are  at  no  loss  to  find  an  instance 
wherein,  on  Peter's  behaving  improperly,  Paul  not  only  op- 
posed, but  publickly  and  sharplv  rebuked  him.  The  passage 
well  deserves  your  notice.  You  will  find  it  in  the  epistle  to 
the  Galatians,  ii,  11,  &c.  When  Peter  was  come  to  Antloch^ 
says  Paul,  I  -withstood  him  to  the  face^  because  he  was  to  be 
blamed :  for  before  that  certain  came  from  fames^  he  did  eat 
•with  the  Gentiles^  but  when  they  were  come^  he  withdrew,  and 
separated  himself^  fearing  them  which  wiere  of  the  circumcision. 
And  the  other  Jews  dissembled  likewise  zvith  hiyn^  insomuch^  that 
Barnabas  also  was  carried  away  with  their  dissimulation.  But 
when  I  saw  that  they  "walked  not  uprightly^  according  to  the 
truth  of  the  gospel.^  I  said  to  Peter ^  before  them  all^  If  thou  be- 
ing a  Jew,  livest  after  the  manner  of  the  Gentiles^  and  not  as  do 
the  jfews^  why  compellest  thou  the  Gefitiles  to  live  as  do  the 
Jews  ?  Was  this  a  treatment  from  a  mere  delegate  to  his 
principal,  nay  more,  from  one  of  the  sheep,  those  stupid  i ir- 
rational animals,  to  his  shepherd,  (for  mark,  that  according 
to  Lainez,  Peter  was  the  sole  shepherd,  they  all,  in  respect  of 
him,  were  sheep)  from  a  fallible  member  of  the  church  to 
Christ's  only  vicar,  to  the  infallible  head  and  pcistor  ?  Whiit 
matter  of  triumph  would  there  have  been  here  to  the  Ro- 
manist, if  the  case  had  been  reversed,  and  Peter  had,  in  a  man- 
ner, to  appearance,  so  authoritative  judged  and  rebulced 
Paul?  Our  ears  would  have  been  stunned  with  the  repetition 
of  a  demonstration,  so  irrefragable,  of  the  supremacy  of  Pe- 
ter, and  consequently  of  Rome.  Yet  there  would  have  been 
no  real  ground  of  triumph  had  it  been  so.     If  any  regard  is 


300  LECTURES  ON 

to  be  had  to  the  accounts  pf  insplratton,  it  is  manifest,  that 
none  of  them,  though  apostles,  were  infallible  ;  and  that  as 
the)  were  all,  by  their  vocation,  brethren  and  equals,  and  ex- 
pressly called  so  by  their  master,  in  a  passage  wherein  he  pro- 
hibits their  either  giving  or  assuming  a  superiority  one  over 
another,  it  was  their  duty  to  correct  one  another  in  love,  and 
not  permit  a  brother  unadmonished  to  persist  in  any  practice 
truly  blame-worthy.  Passing,  however,  the  article  of  correc- 
tion, of  which  it  appears,  that  Peter,  the  only  infallible  apostle, 
was  the  only  person  of  the  society  that  ever  stood  in  need  ; 
what  evidence  have  we,  of  any  authority,  in  other  respects, 
exercised  by  Peter  over  the  sacred  college  ?  Does  he  ever  call 
them  together,  to  assign  them  their  several  charges,  and  give 
them  instructions  in  relation  to  the  duties  of  their  oflict  ?  or. 
Do  they  ever  have  recourse  to  him  for  tiie  proper  information 
in  regard  to  these  ?  Not  a  vestige,  to  this  purpose,  do  we  find 
in  the  acts  of  the  apostles,  where,  if  there  had  been  such  a 
thing,  it  couid  hardly  have  been  omitted  ;  nor  is  there  the 
least  suggestion,  that  points  this  way,  in  any  of  the  epistles. 
Nay,  not  one  of  the  apostles  do  we  find  sent  on  any  missioo 
whatsoever  by  him.  We  have,  indeed,  as  I  had  occasion  to 
remark  in  a  former  discourse,  a  notable  instance,  in  which  Pe-^ 
ter  and  John  were  sent  on  a  mission  by  the  other  apostles,  who 
were  at  Jerusalem  at  the  time,  but  not  a  single  example  of  an 
apostle,  who  received  either  direction  or  orders  of  any  kind 
from  Peter. 

But  it  would  be  trifling  to  enter  more  into  particulars.  Who 
sees  not  that,  by  this  Jesuit's  way  of  commenting,  not  orJy 
there  is  no  evidence,  that  any  powers  were  conferred  on  the 
other  apostles,  or  on  the  church,  but  it  would  have  been  im- 
possible for  the  inspired  writers  themselves  to  give  us  evidence 
that  there  were  ?  For,  however  clear  and  decisive  their  ex- 
pressions might  have  been,  this  brief  reply  would  have  cut 
them  down  at  once  :  "  All  such  passages  are  to  be  understood 
"  solely  in  respect  of  the  church's  ht-ad,  which  is  the  pope  " 
Suffice  it  then  to  say  of  the  whole  piece,  as  we  may  say  with  the 
greatest  justice,  that  it  is  a  mass  of  falsehoods  and  chiccsnery. 
Some  things  are  affirmed  in  opposition  to  the  fullest  evidence, 
many  things  are  assumed  without  any  evidence,  and  nothing  is 
proved. 

But  it  is  of  some  consequence  to  consider  the  reception  it 
met  with  in  the  council,  as  this  consideration  will  serve  to 
show  the  different  sentiments  whirh  prevailed  at  that  time 
among  Roman  catholicks,  in  relation  to  hierarchy,  and  eccle- 
siastical dominion.  This,  together  with  s<  me  remarks  on  the 
present  state  of  the  papacy,  shall  be  reserved  for  the  subject,  of 
another  lecture. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  SOI 


LECTURE  XXI. 


XN  my  last  lecture,  in  order  to  give  you  some  idea  of  the  sub- 
limity and  plenitude  of  the  spiritual  power  and  prerogatives, 
claimed  in  behalf  of  his  holiness,  by  the  partisans  of  th^  see  of 
Rome,  and,  at  the  same  time,  to  give  you  some  taste  of  their 
manner  of  supporting  their  claims  from  scripture  and  antiquity, 
I  exhibited  to  you  the  substance  of  a  speech  on  episcopal  ju- 
risdiction, delivered  by  the  jesnit  Lainez  in  the  council  of 
Trent.  I  made  also  a  few  strictures  on  his  mode  of  probatioB. 
But  as  it  is  of  more  consequence,  for  understanding  the  pre- 
sent state  of  parties  and  opinions  in  the  Romish  church,  to 
know  the  reception  which  the  Jesuit's  sentiments  met  with  in 
the  council,  I  reserved  this  for  a  principal  part  of  the  subject 
of  my  present  lecture.     I  shall  therefore  begin  with  it. 

"  Of  all  the  orations  that  had  yet  been  delivered  in  the  coua- 
"  cil,  there  was  not  one,  says  our  historian,  more  commended, 
"  and  more  blamed, according  to  the  different  dispositions  of  the 
••*  hearers,  than  was  this  of  Lainez.  By  the  pontificii,  or  pa- 
'*  pists,  (so  do  even  Roman  catholicks  term  the  minions  of 
"  Rome,  and  sticklers  for  every  claim  made  by  the  papacy)  it 
"  was  cried  up  as  most  learned,  bold,  and  well-founded  ;  by 
*'  others  it  was  condemned  as  adulatory,  and  by  some  even  as 
"  heretical.  Many  showed  that  they  were  offended  by  the  as- 
"  perity  of  his  censures,  and  were  determined,  in  the  following 
"  congregations,"  (so  the  meetings  holden  for  deliberation  and 
debate  were  named)  "  to  attack  his  speech  on  every  occa- 
*'  sion,  and  point  out  the  ignorance  and  temerity  which  it  be- 
"  trayed. 

"  The  bishop  of  Paris  having,  when  he  should  have  given 
''  his  sentiments,  been  confined  by  sickness,  said  to  every  body 
*'  who  came  to  see  him,  that  when  there  should  be  a  congrc 
**  gation  that  he  could  attend,  he  would  deliver  his  opinion 


302  LECTURES  ONT 

"  against  that  doctrine  without  reserve,  a  doctrine  which,  un- 
"  heard  of  in  former  ages,  had  been  invented  about  fifty  years 
**  before  by  Gaetan,  in  hope  of  being  made  a  cardinal,  and  had 
"  been  censured,  on  its  first  publication,  by  the  theological  col- 
*'  lege  in  Paris,  called  the  Sorbon,  a  doctrine  which,  instead 
*'  of  representing  the  church  as  the  heavenly  kingdom,  agree- 
**  ably  to  the  denomination  given  her  in  scripture,  exhibits  her 
*'  as  not  a  spiritual  kingdom,  but  a  temporal  tyranny,  taking 
*'  from  her  the  title  of  the  chaste  spouse  of  Christ,  and  making 
^'  her  the  slave  and  prostitute  of  one  man." 

It  was  not  difiicult  to  discover  what  man  he  alluded  to.  In- 
deed, methinks,  this  Parisian  theologist  was  not  far  from  the 
opinion  of  those  protestants,  who  interpret  the  whore  of  Ba- 
bylon, in  the  Apocalypse,  to  be  the  church  of  Rome.  He 
plainlv  acknowledges,  that  the  accounts  given  of  this  church 
by  the  pope's  partisans,  are  exactly  descriptive  of  such  a  cha- 
racter. And  may  we  not  justly  say,  that  a  church,  which 
could  tamely  bear  such  treatment  from  Lainez,  or  any  of  the 
creatures  of  papal  despotism^  deserved  to  be  branded  with  the 
disgraceful  appellation  ?  Or  may  we  not  rather  say,  that  her 
bearing  it  in  the  manner  she  did,  was  a  demonstrative  proof, 
that  the  representation,  given  of  her  state  at  that  time,  was 
just  ?  It  may,  indeed,  excite  some  wonder,  that  the  above- 
named  Jesuit  should  have  chosen  to  adopt  a  style  on  this  sub- 
ject, so  directly  contradictory  to  the  style  of  holy  writ.  Our 
Lord  promises  freedom  to  his  disciples.  *'  You  shall  know  the 
"  truth,  and  the  truth  shall  make  you  free."  By  convincing 
your  judgment,  it  shall  powerfully  operate  upon  5'our  will,  and 
make  your  duty  to  become  your  choice.  Herein  lies  the  most 
perfect  freedom.  "  Again,  "  If  the  Son  make  you  free,  you 
*'  shall  be  free  indeed."  The  service  of  his  disciples  is  not 
like  that  of  a  slave  by  constraint,  arising  solely  from  fear,  it  is 
entirely  voluntary,  proceeding  from  the  noblest  of  motives, 
love.  He  therefore  calls  them  not  servants,  so  much  as  friends, 
and  treats  them  as  such,  communicating  his  purposes  to  them, 
and  engaging  them,  not  by  coercive  methods,  but  by  persua- 
sion. His  law  is,  for  this  reason,  styled  a  law  of  liberty  :  and 
those  who  receive  it  are  required  to  act  as  fret.,  yet  not  u&ing 
their  liberty  for  a  cloak  of  maliciousness.,  but  as  the  willing  ser- 
vants of  God.  Not  the  most  distant  hint  has  he  any  where  gi- 
ven of  his  people's  slavery.  But  Lainez  tells  you,  judging  of 
the  conduct  of  Christ  from  that  of  Rome,  the  very  worst  mo- 
del he  could  have  taken,  that  Jesus  Christ  has  made  his  church 
(that  is,  the  whole  community  of  his  disciples)  a  mere  slave, 
that  has  not  any  sort  of  liberty,  but  is  ever^'^  where,  and  in  every 
thing,  subjected  to  the  dominion  of  an  absolute  despot.     So 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  303 

diflferent  is  the  language  of  this  son  of  Loyola  from  that  of  the 
Son  of  God.  Yet  not  more  different  than  is  the  spirit  of  the 
different  religious  institutions  which  they  teach. 

But  to  return  to  the  bishop's  remarks,  "  Lainez,"  said  he, 
"  maintains,  that  there  is  only  one  bishop  instituted  by  Christ, 
**  and  that  the  other  bishops  have  no  power  unless  dependently 
"  on  him.  I'his  is  as  much  as  to  say,  that  one  only  is  bishop, 
*'  the  rest  are  but  his  vicars,  removable  at  his  pleasure.  For 
"  his  own  part,  he  acknowledged,  he  wished  to  rouse  the  whole 
*'  council,  to  consider  how  the  episcopal  authority,  so  much 
"  depressed,  could  be  preserved  from  annihilation,  since  every 
"  new  congregation  of  regulars,  which  springs  up,  gives  it  a 
"  violent  shock.  The  bishops  had  maintained  their  authority 
*'  entire  till  the  year  1050."  With  this  good  prelate's  leave, 
their  authority  was,  by  the  gradual  encroachments  of  Rome, 
long  before  that  period  greatly  reduced.  Her  supreme  juris- 
diction, both  as  lawgiver,  and  as  judge,  were,  ere  then,  pretty 
firmly  established.  Her  orders  and  canons  were  generally, 
throughout  the  western  churches,  promulged  and  obeyed ; 
recourse  was  had  to  her  for  dispensations,  for  confirmation, 
and  collation,  in  ecclesiastick  offices,  and  for  judgment  by  ap- 
peals. But  these  usurpations  were,  long  before  the  time  of  this 
council,  acquiesced  in  as  rights.  An  acquiescence,  thus  far, 
may  be  considered  as  at  least  virtually  comprehended  in  the 
solemn  oath  of  fidelity,  subjection,  and  obedience,  to  the  pope, 
exacted  of,  and  given  by,  prelates  immediately  before  their 
consecration.  In  regard  to  these,  therefore,  however  objec- 
tionable, they  had  precluded  themselves,  and  could  not  decent- 
ly object  to  them.  Whereas,  those  claims,  to  which  the  Pa- 
risian alluded,  being  more  recent,  though  they  had  surmounted 
the  force  of  opposition,  had  not  yet  survived  the  murmurs  and 
discontents  which  the  introduction  of  them  had  created. 

I  resume  the  prelate's  account  of  the  matter  :  "  It  was  then 
"  in  1050,  that  the  Cluniack  and  Cistertian  congregations,  and 
"  others,  which  arose  in  that  century,  gave  a  signal  blow  to 
"  the  episcopal  order  :  many  functions,  proper  and  essential  to 
"  bishops,  being,  by  their  means,  devolved  upon  Rome.  But 
"  after  the  year  1200,  when  the  mendicants  arose,  almost  the 
*'  whole  exercise  of  episcopal  authority  has  been  taken  away, 
*'  and  given  to  them  by  privilege.  At  length,  this  new  congre- 
"  gation,  (the  Jesuits)  a  society  of  yesterday,  which  is  scarcely 
"  either  secular  or  regular,  as  the  university  of  Paris,  eight 
"  years  ago,  knowing  it  to  be  dangerous  in  matters  of  faith, 
"  pernicious  to  the  peace  of  the  church,  and  destructive  of  mo- 
"  nachism,  has  well  observed,  (this  congregation,  I  say)  that  it 
''  might  ouido  its  predecessors,  has  attempted  to  subvert  en- 


304  LECTURES  ON 

♦'tirely  episcopal  jurisdiction,  denying  it  to  be  from  God,  and 
"  wanting  it  to  be  acknowledged  as  from  men,  and  therefore 
"  precarious  and  mutable. 

"  These  things,"  says  the  historian,  "  repeated  by  the  bishop 
*'  to  different  persons,  as  occasion  offered,  moved  many  others 
**^  to  reflect,  who  had  at  first  given  little  attention  to  the  subject. 
*'  But  among  those  who  had  any  knov/ledge  of  history,  not  a 
**  little  was  spoken  concerning  that  observation,  saxiro  prxsente 
*'  concUio^  which  appeared  in  all  the  canonical  codes,  but  not 
*^  having  been  attended  to,  seemed  new  to  every  body.  Some 
**  approved  the  Jesuit's  interpretation,  some  interpreted  it  in  a 
^*  sense  quite  contrary,  that  the  council  had  refused  to  approve 
**  that  sentence  :  others,  taking  another  route,  argued,  that  as 
**  the  matter  treated  on  that  occasion  was  temporal,  and  the 
'*  contentions  were  worldly,  one  could  not  infer  from  its  pro- 
"  cedure,  in  that  instance,  that  the  same  thing  ought  to  be  done 
*••  in  treating  matters  of  faith,  and  ecclesiastical  rites  ;  especi- 
*'  ally,  when  it  is  considered,  that  in  the  first  council  of  the 
*^  apostles  at  Jerusalem,  which  ought  to  be  our  rule  and  exam- 
"  plar,  the  decree  was  not  made  by  Peter,  either  in  presence  of 
"  the  council,  or  with  its  approbation,  but  was  entitled  the  epis- 
**  tie,  with  the  addition  of  the  names  of  three  degrees  assem- 
*'  bled  in  that  congregation,  apostles,  elders,  and  brethren  ;  and 
**  Peter  unnamed  was,  without  prerogative  or  distinction,  in- 
*^  eluded  in  the  first  degree,  apostles  ;  an  example  which,  in 
•*  respect  of  antiquity  and  divine  authority,  ought  to  discredit 
"  all  the  examples,  on  the  opposite  side,  that  can  be  deduced 
^  from  subsequent  times.'* 

I  have  observed  how  degrading  and  dishonourable,  accord- 
ing to  the  bishop,  the  picture  was  which  Lainez  had  drawn  of 
the  church  of  Christ,  and  taken  notice  of  the  strong  resem- 
blance, though  perfectly  unintended,  which  from  the  Parisian's 
comment,  appears,  in  the  Jesuit's  sentiments,  to  what  was 
then  affirmed  by  their  adversaries,  the  protestants,  in  regard 
to  the  church  of  Rome.  It  may  not  be  improper  to  observe 
here,  that  even  an  avowed  coincidence  with  these,  if  we  may 
judge  from  the  language  they  used,  was  at  that  time  not  un- 
frequent  in  some  of  those  who,  though  greatly  dissatisfied, 
never  chose  to  separate  from  the  Romish  communion.  It 
mav  not  be  improper  to  give  one  specimen  of  the  complaints 
then  so  common,  in  order  to  show  how  great  the  dissatisfaction 
was  at  the  torrent  of  corruption  which  universally  prevailed, 
and  to  suggest  what  was  the  general  opinion  in  regard  to  the 
fountain  whence  the  prevalent  corruption  flowed.  Among 
many  instances,  that  might  be  given,  i  shall  select  one  oi  a 
very  publick  nature,  the  s^jeech  pronounced  by  the  French 


IKCCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  mi 

ambassadour  Ferrier,  when  he  produced  his  credentials  in  the 
above-named  council.  Let  it  be  remarked,  that  France  was 
then  involved  in  a  civil  war  between  the  Roman  catholicks  and 
the  Hugonots,  the  name  then  given  to  the  reformed  in  that 
country  by  their  enemies.  After  a  preamble,  in  which  he  ex- 
patiates ori  the  pious  intentions  of  the  king,  his  master,  his 
great  merits  in  respect  of  the  zeal  he  had  shown  for  the  ca- 
tholick  church,  and  even  for  the  dignity  and  authority  of  the 
sovereign  pontiff;  he,  on  the  matter,  acknowledges,  that  it  is 
this  zeal  alone  which  occasioned  all  the  intestine  broils  where- 
with his  reign  was  at  that  time  disturbed  >  for  that  if  he  had 
no  further  aim,  than  securing  due  obedience  to  his  own  civil 
authority,  and  maintaining  the  peace  of  the  kingdom,  every 
thing  might  be  settled  to  his  satisfaction  in  three  days.  In 
this  his  excellency  gave  a  more  honourable  testimony  to  the 
dispositions  of  the  protestants,  in  his  country,  than  probably  he 
had  intended.  At  least,  he  showed  that  the  aggression  and 
persecution  were  entirely  on  the  other  side,  and  that  the  pro- 
testants, whether  right  or  wrong  in  resisting,  acted  merely  on 
the  defensive.  When  coming  towards  a  conclusion,  after 
many  free  and  spirited  things,  he  adds,  "  The  most  christian 
'  king  demands  of  this  council  nothing  but  what  all  the  chris- 
'  tian  world  demands,  what  the  great  Constantino  demanded 

*  of  the  fathers  of  the  Nicene  council.  His  Majesty's  re- 
'  quests  are  all  comprehended  in  the  sacred  scriptures,  the 
'  ancient  councils  of  the  catholick  church,  the  old  constitu- 
'  tions,  decrees,  and  canons,  of  the  pontiffs  and  fathers.  He 
'  demands  of  those  whom  Christ  hath  constituted  judges,  the 

*  entire  restoration  of  the  catholick  church,  not  by  a  decree 
'  in  loose  and  general  terms,  but  according  to  the  forni  of  the 
'  express  words  of  that  perpetual  and  divine  edict,  against 

which  usurpation  or  prescription  can  have  no  place  ;  so  that 
those  good  ordinances,  which  the  devil  has  violently  robbed 
us  of,  and  long  concealed,  may  at  length  return,  as  from 
captivity,  into  the  holy  city  of  God,  and  the  light  of  men." 
He  adduced  the  example  of  Darius,  who  quieted  the  tumults 
of  Judea,  not  by  arms,  but  by  executing  the  ancient  edict  of 
Cyrus.  That  of  Josiah  also,  who  reformed  religion  by  caus- 
ing the  book  of  the  law,  which  had  been  hidden  through  the 
malice  of  men,  to  be  read  to  the  people,  and  observed  by  them* 
Then,  continues  the  historian,  he  made  use  of  a  very  cutting 
expression :  "  If  the  fathers,"  said  he,  "  should  ask,  why 
*'  France  is  not  in  peace,  no  other  answer  can  be  given,  than 
*'  that  which  Jehu  gave  to  Joram,  What  peace  can  there  be  so 
■••'  long  as "  Here  he  stopped,  and  after  pausing  a  lit- 
tle, added,  "  You  know  the  rest."      The  story  referred  to  we*. 


306  LECTURES  ON 

have  in  the  ninth  chapter  of  the  second  book  of  Kings.  The 
words  to  which  he  pointed  so  distinctly  that  they  could  not  be 
mistaken,  but  which  he  judged  it  convenient  to  suppress,  we 
have  in  the  twenty-second  verse,  where  we  are  told,  that  when 
Jehu  was  asked  by  Joram,  whether  there  was  peace,  he  an- 
swered, What  peace,  so  long  ae  the  whoredoms  of  thy  mother 
Jezebel,  and  her  witchcrafts,  are  so  many  ?  It  was  impossible, 
considering  when,  where,  and  to  whom,  the  ambassadour  was 
directing  his  discourse,  to  entertain  a  doubt  concerning  his 
meaning.  The  respectable  appellation  of  mother  had  been 
given  to  the  church  time  immemorial,  individual  christians 
were  denominated  her  children.  In  regard  to  particular 
churches,  they  had  been  for  ages,  in  the  west,  considered  as 
the  daughters  of  Rome.  The  Roman  church  was  their  com- 
mon mother,  so  that  this  gentleman,  addressing  himself  to  the 
Tridentine  fathers,  who  represented  their  respective  churches 
in  the  council,  and  in  the  midst  of  whom  the  pope's  legates  sat 
as  presidents,  had  the  boldness  to  call  the  church  of  the 
haughty  and  imperious  Rome,  not  in  so  many  words,  but  as 
intelligibly  and  manifestly  a  harlot,  a  sorceress,  a  Jezebel,  the 
source  of  all  their  calamities.  Indeed,  the  happy  aposiopesis 
he  employed,  rendered  the  invective  more  energetical,  and  the 
intended  application  more  unquestionable,  than  if  he  had  spo- 
ken out.  If  he  had  spoken  out,  there  would  have  been  still 
room  for  suspicion,  that  (however  unlikely)  he  must  have  had 
some  other  meaning  to  the  words,  else  he  could  not,  to  their 
faces,  have  employed  terms  so  opprobrious.  The  method  he 
took,  at  the  same  time  that  it  left  no  doubt  as  to  the  expression 
to  be  supplied,  betrayed  a  consciousness,  that  he  considered  it 
both  as  incapable  of  any  other  application,  and  as  too  gross  for 
utterance.  Would  not  one  be  tempted  to  think,  that  either  the 
French  monarch  had  mistaken  the  principles  of  the  servant  he 
employed  on  this  occasion,  or  that  the  latter  had  mistaken  to- 
tally the  intent  of  his  embassy,  and  was  actually  pleading  the 
cause  of  the  protestants  before  the  council,  and  not  that  of  his 
master,  who  was  endeavouring,  by  all  possible  means,  to  exter- 
minate them  ?  He  concluded  with  declaring,  that  if  the  refor- 
mation he  proposed  was  not  quickly  and  seriously  applied  to, 
all  the  assistance  of  the  king  of  Spain,  (by  arms  doubtless  he 
meant)  of  the  pope,  and  of  the  other  princes,  would  be  to  no 
purpose,  and  that  the  blood  of  those  who  should  perish,  though 
deservedly,  on  account  of  their  own  sins,  would  be  required  at 
the  hands  of  the  fathers  then  assembled.  This  discourse,  as 
may  well  be  imagined,  excited  very  great  indignation  ;  but 
matters  were  then  so  critically  circumstanced,  and  the  fear  of 
offending  the  king  of  France,  and  perhaps  provoking  him  to 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  307 

adopt  less  sanguinary  measures  with  his  revolted  subjects, 
made  even  the  keenest  advocates  for  the  papacy  to  stifle  their 
resentments,  and  take  no  notice  of  the  offensive  expressions. 

Having  exhibited  to  you  the  state  of  the  papal  claims  of 
jurisdiction  over  the  clergy,  at  that  most  memorable  era,  the 
reformation  in  the  sixteenth  century,  I  shall  now  attempt  to 
convey  some  idea  of  the  claims  then  advanced  in  behalf  of  the 
clergy,  in  the  first  instance,  and  ultimately  of  the  pope,  in 
whom  they  all  terminated,  over  the  laity,  especially  over  the 
secular  powers.  P'or  this  purpose,  I  shall  here  lay  before  you 
the  scheme  prepared  in  the  same  convention,  for  the  reforma- 
tion of  princes  and  civil  magistrates,  which,  though  in  the 
situation  of  things  at  that  time,  and  on  account  of  the  strenu- 
ous opposition  from  the  temporal  powers,  it  was  not  found 
convenient  to  push,  yet  has  never  been  departed  from,  nor 
abandoned,  by  those  of  that  establishment ;  on  the  contrary, 
the  several  articles  have,  for  ages,  afTorded  matter  of  con- 
tention and  struggles  in  all  nations  of  Christendom.  Much 
has  been  attained,  and  hardly  has  a  proper  opportunity  been 
omitted  of  asserting  even  the  most  extravagant  of  them.  The 
bill  prepared  for  this  purpose,  contained  a  preamble,  thirteen 
decrees,  and  a  conclusion.     It  was  in  substance  as  follows  :— - 

The  council,  beside  the  statutes  enacted  for  reforming  per- 
sons ecclesiastical,  have  judged  it  their  duty  to  reform  also 
secular  persons  of  those  abuses,  which  have  been  introduced 
against  the  immunities  of  the  church,  confident  that  princes 
will  acquiesce,  and  cause  due  obedience  to  be  rendered  to  the 
clergy.  To  this  end  they  are  admonished,  before  other  things, 
to  oblige  their  magistrates,  delegates,  and  other  temporal  lords, 
to  render  their  pastors  that  obedience,  which  those  princes 
themselves  are  bound  to  perform  to  the  sovereign  pontiff;  and 
for  this  purpose  anew  enforces  whatever  has  been  decreed  by 
the  sacred  canons,  and  the  imperial  laws  in  favour  of  ecclesias- 
tical immunities,  which  ought  to  be  observed  by  all  under  pain 
of  anathema.  The  principal  decrees  are  the  following  :  that 
persons  ecclesiastical,  even  though  their  clerical  title  should 
be  doubtful,  and  though  they  themselves  should  consent,  can- 
not, under  any  pretext,  even  that  of  publick  utility,  be  judged 
in  a  secular  judicatoiy.  Even  in  cases  of  notorious  assassina- 
tion, or  other  excepted  cases,  their  prosecution  must  be  pre- 
ceded by  a  declaration  of  the  bishop  of  the  diocese.  That  in 
causes  spiritual,  matrimonial,  those  of  heresy,  tithes,  &c.  civil, 
criminal,  mixed,  belonging  to  the  ecclesiastical  court,  as  well 
over  persons  as  over  goods,  tenths,  &c.  pertaining  to  the  church, 
the  temporal  judge  cannot  intermeddle,  notwithstanding  any 
appeal,  &c.  j  and  those  who,  in  such  causes,  shall,  recur  to  the, 


M^  LECTURES  ON 

secular  power,  shall  be  excommunicated,  arid  deprived  of  the 
rights  contended  for.  Secular  men  cannot  constitute  judges 
.  in  causes  ecclesiastical,  and  clergymen,  who  shall  accept  such 
offices  from  laymen,  shall  be  suspended  from  orders,  deprived 
of  benefices  and  incapacitated.  The  secular  cannot  comman4 
the  ecclesiastical  judge  not  to  excommunicate  without  licence, 
or  to  revoke,  or  suspend,  an  excommunication  fulminated. 
No  king  or  emperour  can  make  edicts,  relating  to  causes  or 
persons  ecclesiastical,  or  intermeddle  with  their  jurisdiction, 
or  even  with  the  inquisition,  but  are  obliged  to  lend  their  arra, 
to  the  ecclesiastical  judges  when  called  on.  Rulers  may  not', 
put  their  hand  to  the  fruits  of  vacant  benefices,  under  pre--,! 
tence  of  custody,  protection,  Stc.  ;  secular  persons,  who  shall 
accept  such  offices,  shall  be  excommunicated,  and  clergymen 
suspended  and  deprived.  Ecclesiasticks  shall  not  be  con- 
strained to  pay  taxes,  excise,  &c.  not  even  under  the  name  of 
free  gifts,  or  loans,  either  for  patrimonial  goods,  or  the  goods 
of  the  church.  The  letters,  sentences,  and  citations,  of  the 
ecclesiastick  judges,  especially  of  the  court  of  Rome,  shall,' 
immediately  on  being  exhibited,  be,  without  exception,  inti- 
mated and  executed,  &c.  If  there  be  any  doubt  that  the  letters 
are  forged,  or  that  tumults  will  arise,  the  bishop,  as  apostolick 
delegate,  may  order  the  needful  precautions.  Princes  and 
magistrates  shall  not  quarter  their  officers,  &c.  on  the  houses, 
or  monasteries  of  ecclesiasticks,  nor  draw  thence  aught  for 
victuals,  or  passage  money.  There  were  several  other  articles 
of  the  saxne  stamp,  which  it  is  not  necessary  to  enumerate. 
The  above  will  sufficiently  serve  for  a  specimen. 

By  way  of  conclusion,  there  was  an  admonition  to  all 
princes,  to  have  in  veneration  the  things  which  are  of  eccle- 
siastical right,  as  pertaining  to  God,  and  not  to  allow  others 
herein  to  offend,  renewing  all  the  constitutions  of  sovereign 
pontiffs,  and  sacred  canons  in  favour  of  ecclesiastical  immu- 
nities ;  commanding,  under  pain  of  anathema,  that,  neither 
directly  nor  indirectly,  under  any  pretence,  aught  be  enacted 
or  executed  against  ecclesiastical  persons,  or  goods,  or  against 
their  liberty  ;  any  privilege  or  immemorial  exemption  to  the 
contrary  notwithstanding. 

Such  was  the  famous  bill  of  rights,  (if  I  may  so  express 
myself)  of  the  clergy  of  Christendom  in  the  sixteenth  century, 
on  which  I  shall  beg  leave  to  make  a  few  remarks.  In  the 
first  place,  it  is  evident,  that  these  articles  imply  a  total  inde- 
pendence of  the  ecclesiastick  on  the  secular  powers,  inasmuch 
as  the  latter  could,  on  this  plan,  use  no  coercive  measures, 
either  for  preventing  the  commission  of  crimes  by  the  former, 
or  for  punishing  them  when  committed,  could  not,  even  for 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  309 

the  eviction  of  civil  debts,  or  discharge  of  lawful  obligations, 
affect  the  clergy  either  in  person,  or  in  property,  moveable  or 
immovable,  could  exact  from  them  no  aid  for  the  exigencies 
of  the  state,  however  urgent.  Now  allowing  that  the  inde- 
pendence were  equal  on  both  sides,  it  might  admit  a  question, 
whether  it  be  possible  that  two  such  independent  states, 
whereof  the  subjects  of  each  live  together  as  members  of  the 
same  community,  and  are  blended  in  all  the  ordinary  duties 
and  concerns  of  life,  could  subsist  any  time  on  that  footing. 
I  observe,  secondly,  that  the  independence  was  solely  on  the 
side  of  the  clergy.  The  laity  could  not,  by  their  civil  sanc- 
tions, affect  the  clergy  without  their  own  concurrence  ;  but 
the  clergy,  both  by  their  civil  and  by  their  religious  sanctions, 
could  affect  the  laity,  and,  in  spite  of  their  opposition,  whilst 
the  people  had  any  religion,  bring  the  most  ol)stinate  to  their 
terms.  The  civil  judge  could  not  compel  a  clergyman  to 
appear  before  his  tribunal,  the  ecclesiastick  judge  could  com- 
pel a  layman,  and  did,  daily,  compel  such  to  appear  before 
him.  And  in  all  the  interferings  and  disputes  between  indi- 
viduals of  the  different  orders,  the  clerical  only  could  decide. 
The  ecclesiastick  powers  could  command  the  aid  of  the  secu- 
lar, the  secular  could  not  that  of  the  ecclesiastical.  I  obsei've, 
thirdly,  that  though  the  kinds  of  power,  in  the  different  orders, 
were  commonly  distinguished  into  spiritual  and  temporal,  the 
much  greater  part  of  the  power  of  ecclesiasticks  was  strictly 
temporal.  Matters  spiritual  are  those  only  of  faith  and  man- 
ners, and  the  latter  only  as  manners,  that  is,  as  influencing 
opinion,  wounding  charity,  or  raising  scandal.  Whereas, 
under  the  general  term  spiritual^  they  had  got  included  the 
more  important  part  of  civil  matters  also,  affairs  matrimonial 
and  testamentary,  questions  of  legitimacy  and  succession, 
covenants  and  conventions,  and  wherever  the  interposition  of 
an  oath  was  customary.  Add  to  these,  that  they  were  the 
sole  arbiters  of  the  rights  avowedly  civil  of  the  church  and 
churchmen,  and  in  every  thing  wherein  these  had,  in  common 
with  laymen,  any  share  or  concern.  Though  these  privileges 
{weakly  called  immunities,  since  they  imply  dominion)  had, 
for  centuries,  been  claimed  by  the  clerical  order,  many  of 
them  in  most  countries  actually  obtained,  and  the  rest  made 
.matter  of  incessant  broils  and  contentions  j  yet  all  of  them 
were  never  any  where  acquiesced  in  by  the  secular  powers. 
Had  they,  indeed,  admitted  them  in  their  full  extent,  the 
abolition  of  the  secular  authority  would  have  quickly  ensued  ; 
the  priesthood  would  have  engrossed  every  thing.  Christen- 
dom would  have  then  become  in  a  sense  very  different  from 
that  of  the  apostle,  a  royal  priesthood^  or,  as  some  like  to  ren- 


310  LECTURES  ON 

der  his  words,  a  kingdom  of  priests.  In  scripture  the  church 
is  so  denominated  in  the  same  sense,  wherein  it  is  said  of  all 
christians  witliout  exception;  that  they, are  made  kings  and 
priests  to  God  ;  because  all  have  free  access  to  him  through 
the  blood  of  his  Son  ;  not  because  our  instructors  in  holy- 
things,  men  specially  called  to  be  ensamples  to  the  flock,  in 
faith  and  patience,  in  resignation  and  humility,  were  consti- 
tuted lords  with  plenary  power,  both  temporal  and  spiritual, 
over  God's  heritage.  I  observe,  in  the  last  place,  that  an 
ordinary  reader,  who  has  not  entered  thoroughly  into  the 
spirit  of  those  times,  cannot  fail  to  be  exceedingly  surprised, 
(as  I  acknowledge  I  was  myself)  on  the  first  perusal  of  the 
aforesaid  overtures.  They  are  ushered  in  as  pious  resolutions 
to  be  adopted  by  the  council,  for  the  reformation  of  princes 
and  secular  persons.  One  is  naturally  led  to  expect,  that  in 
such  a  writing,  calculated  purely  to  reform  the  great,  their 
faults  will,  with  christian  freedom,  but  in  the  spirit  of  meek- 
ness, be  animadverted  on  ;  that  one  shall  find  a  just  censure 
on  the  pride,  the  luxury,  the  impiety,  the  extortion,  the  envy, 
the  revenge,  and  the  other  vices  which  so  often  abound  among 
those  in  high  rank  and  authority;  or  that  one  shall  see  branded 
with  proper  severity,  that  unchristian  ambition,  which  leads 
sovereigns  so  often,  though  fellow-christians  in  profession,  to 
make  war  on  one  another,  on  the  most  trivial  pretences,  to 
the  destruction  of  one  moiety  of  their  subjects,  the  oppression 
of  the  other,  and  dishonour  of  the  christian  name.  But  not  a 
syllable  of  these.  Was  there  nothing  of  this  kind,  then,  among 
the  powers  of  Europe  ?  Never,  perhaps,  was  there  more. 
Yet  this  venerable  body  seemed  to  think,  that  there  was 
nothing  in  their  earthly  potentates  which  would  need  correc- 
tion, were  they  sufficiently  submissive  to  their  ghostly  fathers, 
the  bishops  and  the  priests,  that  is,  in  effect,  would  they  but 
resign  to  them  their  whole  authority,  and  consent  to  become 
their  humble  slaves,  a  virtue,  it  seems,  more  successful,  in 
the  eyes  of  their  reverences,  than  charity  itself  in  covering 
sins. 

In  the  same  spirit,  the  seventeenth  canon  of  general  refor- 
mation, passed  in  the  last  session  of  that  council,  has  these 
words  :  "  Against  those  bishops,  who  in  church,  or  out  of  it, 
"  behave  themselves  meanly  towards  the  ministers  of  kings, 
"  persons  of  quality,  and  barons,  and  with  too  much  indignity, 
"  not  only  give  place  to  them,  but  do  them  personal  service, 
"  the  synod,  detesting  this  conduct,  and  renewing  the  canons 
"  concerning  the  decorum  of  episcopal  dignity,  commands 
"  bishops  to  beware  of  such  practices,  and  every  where  to 
"  challenge  due  respect  to  their  degree.,  remembering  they- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  311 

**  are  pastors  ;  and  also  commands  princes  and  all  others  to 
**  bear  them  the  honour  and  reverence  due  to  fathers."  How 
high  their  claims  went,  we  learn  from  a  canon  of  the  council 
of  Troyes,  in  the  ninth  century,  which  orders,  that  no  man 
shall  presume  to  sit  in  the  presence  of  a  bishop,  unless  he 
command  it.  We  know  who  they  were  in  ancient  times  that 
sought  honour  one  of  another,  who  affected  the  principal  seats 
in  the  synagogues,  and  the  uppermost  rooms  at  feasts,  who 
loved  greetings  in  the  markets,  and  to  be  called  of  men. 
Rabbi,  Rabbi.  We  know  also  who  it  was  that  expressly  pro- 
hibited, amongst  his  disciples,  such  unbecoming  emulation  and 
worldly  vanity,  who  enjoined  them  not  to  seek  honour  from 
men,  or  to  contend  who,  in  the  judgment  of  men,  should  be 
greatest,  but  to  seek  that  honour  only  which  cometh  from 
God  ;  we  know  also  who  it  was  that  made  usefulness  the 
standard  of  greatness,  and  pronounced  him  to  be  possessed  of 
the  highest  dignity,  who  is  most  humble  and  most  service- 
able ;  who,  instead  of  courting,  is  solicitous  to  avoid  such 
enviable  distinctions.  On  which  of  these  models  the  con- 
vention at  Trent,  and  other  preceding  councils,  were  formed, 
I  shall  leave  to  the  candid  and  impartial  to  determine.  I 
shall  conclude  this  lecture  with  a  story,  homely  indeed,  but 
apposite:  An  English  country  parson  was  bragging,  in  a  large 
company,  of  the  success  he  had  had  in  reforming  his  pari- 
shioners, on  whom  his  labours,  he  said,  had  produced  a  won- 
derful change  to  the  better.  Being  asked  in  what  respect,  he 
replied,  that  when  he  came  first  among  them,  they  were  a  set 
of  unmannerly  clowns,  who  paid  him  no  more  deference  than 
they  did  to  one  another,  did  not  so  much  as  pull  off  their  hat 
when  they  spoke  to  him,  but  bawled  out  as  roughly  and 
familiarly  as  though  he  were  their  equal ;  whereas  now,  they 
never  presumed  to  address  him  but  cap  in  hand,  and,  in  a 
submissive  voice,  made  him  their  best  bow,  when  they  were 
at  ten  yards  distance,  and  st\  led  him  your  reverence^  at  every 
word.  A  Quaker,  who  had  heard  the  whole  patiently,  made 
answer:  *'  And  so,  friend,  the  upshot  of  this  reformation,  of 
"  which  thou  hast  so  much  carnal  glorying,  is,  that  thou  hast 
**  taught  thy  people  to  worship  thyself."  So  much  for  clerical 
and  papal  claims.  But,  in  order  to  know  more  exactly  the 
state  of  those  times,  we  must  be  acquainted  with  the  senti- 
ments of  both  sides  on  every  principal  question.  I  shall, 
therefore,  in  my  next  lecture,  take  notice  of  the  reception, 
which  those  articles  of  reformation  I  have  read  to  you»  met 
with  from  the  secular  powers. 


312  LECTURES  ON 


LECTURE  XXIL 


XN  my  two  last  prelections,  I  laid  before  you,  in  their  utmost 
extent,  the  papal  claims  of  jurisdiction  over  the  clergy,  and  the 
clerical  claims  not  only  of  independence,  but  of  authority  over 
the  secular  powers.  I  promised  to  take  notice,  in  the  present 
lecture,  of  the  reception  which  the  last  mentioned  claims  over 
the  secular  powers  met  with  from  those  against  whom  they 
were  aimed. 

Copies  of  those  articles,  for  the  reformation  of  princes  and 
magistrates,  having  been  sent  Iiy  the  ambassadours  to  their  re- 
spective courts,  they  were  instructed  to  give  them  all  the  oppo- 
sition in  their  power.  In  this  resolution,  none  were  more  de- 
termined than  the  emperour,  and  the  king  of  France.  The 
former  wrote  to  cardinal  Moron,  that  neither  as  emperour, 
nor  as  archduke,  would  he  ever  consent,  that  they  should 
speak  in  council  of  reforming  the  jurisdiction  of  princes,  or 
of  divesting  them  of  their  right  to  draw  contributions  from 

jithe  clergy  ;  that  he  considered  all  their  past  evils  as  having 
sprung  from  the  oppressions  attempted  by  ecclesiasticks,  both 
on  the  people  and  on  the  princes.  The  French  anibassadours 
prepared  a  protestation,  which  they  were  commanded  to  make, 
if  there  should  be  occasion  for  it. 

In  one  of  their  meetings  called  congregations,  one  of  the 
fathers,  in  a  long  speech,  advanced,  that  the  cause  of  all  their 
corruptions  proceeded  from  the  princes,  who,  of  all  men,  had 
the  greatest  need  of  reformation  ;  adding,  that  the  heads  of  a 
scheme  for  this  purpose  were  already  digested,  meaning  that 
which  I  gave  you  in  a  preceding  lecture,  and  that  it  was  now 

'time  to  propose  them,  and  not  suffer  so  important  a  design  to 
come  to  nothing  through  their  dilatoriness.     As  here  the  rights 

^  of  sovereigns  were  touched,  the  ambassadour  Ferrier,  of  whose 
Vehemence,  as  well  as  freedom  in  speaking  I  have  already 
given  you  a  specimen,  interposed,  and,  in  a  ver)^  resolute  tone, 
supported  the  rights  of  the  secular  powers  in  general,  and  of 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  31^ 

his  master  the  king  of  France  in  particular.  Though  he  was 
by  no  means  destitute  of  eloquence,  his  eloquence  was  not  al- 
ways adapted  to  time  and  place. 

The  liberty  of  expression,  in  which  he  indulged  himself, 
was  too  great  for  the  prejudices  of  the  age  in  which  he  lived  ; 
and  the  reflections  which  he  threw  out  were  too  galling,  to  be 
t)orne  by  men  of  so  much  importance  as  those  reverend  fa- 
thers, who  looked  on  themselves  as  the  only  rightful  legislators 
of  the  universe,  and  whose  authority  they  deemed  it  treason, 
or  what  was  still  worse,  sacrilege,  even  in  sovereigns  to  dis- 
pute. 

Ferrier,  in  his  oration,  lamented,  that  christian  kings  had 
now,  for  more  than  a  hundred  and  fifty  years,  at  the  councils 
of  Constance,  Basil,  Lateraa,  and  Trent,  been  earnestly  re- 
quiring of  popes  the  reform  of  ecclesiastick  discipline,  and 
that  all  their  endeavours  had  proved  abortive.  They  had,  in- 
deed, got  a  large  return  of  decrees  and  anathemas.  They  de- 
manded one  thing,  and  they  are  put  off  with  another  ;  inso- 
much, that  in  all  probability,  for  three  hundred  years  to  come, 
the  same  grievances  will  be  lamented,  and  the  same  requests 
of  redress  will  be  made  to  no  better  purpose.  In  regard  to 
the  huge  mass  of  reforms  which  had  occupied  the  council  for 
some  months  past,  they  had  sent  their  opinion  of  it  to  the  king, 
who,  in  return,  wrote  them,  that  he  found  therein  few  things 
conformable,  but  many  contrary  to  ancient  discipline. 

F'errier  maintained  further,  that  the  plaster  which  they  had 
been  preparing,  far  from  being  adapted  to  heal  the  wounds  of 
the  church,  could  serve  only  to  make  them  fester,  and  to  cause 
even  sores  that  had  been  healed,  to  break  out  afresh  :  particu- 
larly that  those  expedients  of  excommunicating  and  anathema- 
tizing princes  were  unexampled  in  the  primitive  church,  and 
solely  calculated  for  opening  a  wide  gate  to  rebellion  in  every 
state  ;  that  the  whole  chapter  of  the  reformation  of  kings  and 
princes  had  no  other  aim,  than  to  divest  their  temporal  rulers 
of  all  authority.  Yet  by  such  rulers  some  excellent  ecclesias- 
tick laws  had  been  made,  which  even  popes  had  not  disdained 
to  adopt,  honouring  their  authors  with  the  name  of  saints  ;  that 
by  those  laws  the  church  had  been  governed,  not  only  since 
the  times  of  the  pragmatick  and  the  concordate,  but  before,nay, 
for  more  than  four  hundred  years  before  the  book  of  decretals, 
which  later  popes  had  got  substituted  into  their  place,  had  been 
so  much  as  heard  of.  He  then  attempted  a  comparison  between 
the  ancient  canons  and  the  modern,  particularly  the  regulations 
made  for  the  reform  of  discipline  in  the  preceding  sessions  of 
the  present  council,  exposing  the  futility  of  their  new  canons 
in  a  strain  of  contemptuous  irony,  the  most  provoking  imagi- 

R  r 


S14  LECTURES  ON 

nable.     He  maintained,  that  the  king,  his  master,  the  founder 
and  patron  of  ahnost  all  the  churches  of  France,  may,  for  the 
instant  and  urgent  necessities  of  the  state,  in  consequence  of 
the  power  given  him  of  God,  and  by  the  most  ancieat  laws  of 
the  kingdom,  freely  avail  himself  of  even   the    ecclesiastical 
goods  and  rents  of  his  subjects.     He  said,   that  the  king  was 
particularly  surprised  at  two  things  ;  that  those  fathers  adorned 
■with  great  ecclesiastical  power  in  the  divine  ministry,  and  as- 
sembled solely  for  restoring  ecclesiastical  discipline,  not  atten- 
ding to  that,  had  turned  aside  to  reform  those  whom,  though 
wicked,  it  behoved  them  to   obey  and  pray    for  ;  and  he  was 
surprised  still  more,  that  they  should  imagine  themselves    en- 
titled, without  admonition,  to  excommunicate  and  anathema- 
tize princes,  who  are   given  them  of  God,  a  thing  not  to  be 
done  even  to  a  plebeian,  who  perseveres  in  a  heinous  transgres- 
sion ;    that  Michael  the  archangel  did  not  dare  to    curse   the 
devil,  neither  did  Michaiah  or  Daniel  curse  the  most  impious 
kings,  yet  those  fathers    vented  all  their  curses  against  kings 
and   princes  ;    nay,    their   maledictions    were    levelled   even 
against  his  most  christian  majesty,  for  defending  the  laws  of 
his  ancestors,  and  the  liberties  of  the  Gallican  church.     He 
concluded,  that  the  king  required  them  not  to  decree  anything 
against  those  laws  and  liberties,  and,  if  they  should,  comman- 
ded his  ambassadours  to  oppose  their  decrees,  as  they  then  did^ 
adding,  that  if,  not  meddling  with  sovereigns,  they  would  at- 
tend to  that  which  all  the  world  expected  of  them,  their  con- 
duct would  be  most  agreeable  to  his  majesty,  and  should  have 
the  utmost   aid  of  his  ministers.     Hitherto  he   spoke    in  the 
nam(  of  the  king.     Then,  in   a  bold  epiphonema,  he  invoked 
heaven  and  earth,  and  the  fathers  themselves,  to  consider  whe- 
ther it  suited  the  time,  to  show  no  sympathy  with  the  church, 
in  the  present  distractions,  or  with  France,  involved  in  a  civil 
war  on  account  of  religion,  but  to  have  all   their  sensibility 
engrossed  by  their  own  dignities,  and  honours,  and  revenues, 
which  cannot  be  preserved  by  other  arts  than  those  whereby 
they  were  acquired  ;  that  in  such  confusions,  it  was  their  duty 
to  repent,  and  when  Christ  cometh,  not  to  bawl  out,   Send  us 
into  the  herd  of  swine  ;  that  if  they  would  restore   the  church 
to  its  ancient  reputation,  bring  adversaries  to  repentance,  and 
reform  princes,  they  should  follow  the  example  of  good  king 
Hezekiah,   who  did  not   imitate   his  impious  father,  nor  the 
first,  counting  backwards,  second,  third  and  fourth  of  his  very 
deficient  progenitors,  but  went  further  back  to  the  imitation 
of  his  remote,  but  more  perfect  ancestors  ;  in  like  manner  it 
behoved  those  fathers  not  to  attend  to  their  immediate  prede- 
cessors,  however  learned,  but  to    ascend  to  an  Ambrose,  ao 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  315 

Aug^istin,  a  Chrysostome,  who  conquered  hereticks,  not  by  the 
modern  method  of  instigating  princes  to  slaughter  them,  but 
by  methods  more  primitive,  by  their  prayers,  by  the  example 
of  a  godly  life,  by  preaching  pure  doctrine  ;  for  if  the  fathers 
whom  he  addressed  M^ould  first  form  themselves  into  Am- 
broses, Augustines,  and  Chrysostomes,  and  thus  purify  the 
ehurch  of  Christ,  they  would  soon  transform  princes  into 
Theodosiuses,  Honoriuses,  Arcadiuses,  Valcntinians,  and  Gra- 
tians.  This  he  prayed  that  with  the  help  of  God  they  might 
eflfectuate,  and  so  concluded. 

We  cannot  wonder,  that  this  bold,  and  even  dictatorial  lan- 
guage, should  irritate,  as  in  fact  it  did,  in  a  very  high  degree, 
not  the  pontificii  only,  but  the  other  nrelates,  even  the  French 
clergy  themselves.  The  historian  tells  us,  that  he  had  no 
sooner  ended,  than  there  arose  such  a  general  murmur,  that 
it  was  found  necessary  to  dismiss  the  congregation.  Some 
taxed  the  discourse  with  heresy  ;  others  said  it  looked  very 
suspicious  ;  almost  all  agreed  that  it  was  offensive  to  pious 
cars,  (meaning,  no  doubt,  their  own)  and  could  be  calculated 
only  to  break  up  the  council ;  that  he  attributed  to  kings  more 
than  belonged  to  them  ;  that  he  inferred  the  pope's  authority 
not  to  be  necessary  to  entitle  them  to  ecclesiastical  goods  ;  that 
he  made  the  king  of  France  like  the  king  of  England,  Harry 
the  eighth,  head  of  the  church  within  his  own  dominions. 
Above  all,  nothing  offended  more  grievously  than  his  suggest- 
ing, that  the  authority  of  the  king  of  France  over  persons 
and  goods,  was  not  founded  on  the  pragmatick,  concordate, 
and  papal  privileges,  but  on  the  law  of  nature,  the  sacred 
scriptures,  the  ancient  councils,  and  laws  of  christian  empe- 
rours.  As  his  speech  was  every  where  attacked,  and  often 
misrepresented,  he  was  obliged  to  disperse  some  copies  of  it 
for  his  own  vindication.  This  occasioned  a  formal  answer  in 
writing,  to  which  he  made  a  spirited  reply. 

The  principal  instruction  to  be  drawn  from  such  altercations, 
is  the  knowledge  they  afford  of  the  opinions  and  the  spirit  of 
the  times,  and  of  the  mode  of  reasoning  employed  in  their 
controversies.  We  are  sometimes  surprised  to  observe,  that 
the  things  which  proved  matter  of  reprehension,  were  such 
as  we  should  have  least  suspected.  Thus  what  he  affirmed  of 
princes  that  they  were  given  of  God,  was  combated  with  great 
keenness  as  heretical,  and  condemned  by  rmam  sane  tarn,  one 
of  the  decrees  very  happily  named  extravagantes  of  pope  Bo- 
niface the  eighth.  He  ought,  said  they,  to  have  distinguish- 
ed, bv  affirming,  they, are  of  God,  mcdiante  sua  vicario.  Ah 
easy  device  for  making  all  power,  temporal  and  sniritual,  to 
be  immediately  from  the  pope,  and  but  mediately  IVom  God. 


31&  LECTURES  ON 

To  their  exceptions  on  this  head,  his  excellency's  answer  wa& 
very  brief.  He  had  not  said  more  simply  and  absolutely,  that 
princes  are  from  God,  than  the  prophet  Daniel  and  the  apostle 
Paul  had  said  before  him,  and  that  if  there  be  no  heresy  in 
their  expressions,  there  can  be  none  in  his  ;  that  for  his  own 
part,  the  distinction  of  mediate  and  immediate,  and  the  ex- 
travagant constitutions  of  Boniface,  never  entered  into  his 
mind.  His  apology,  instead  of  diminishing,  only  increased 
the  odium  and  clamour  against  him.  He  obstinately  defends, 
said  they,  those  errours  \vhich  he  ought  penitently  to  recant. 
His  opposition,  however,  and  the  alarm  taken  by  sovereigns, 
were  sufficient  to  prevent  those  attempts  on  the  secular  power 
being  carried  further.  In  the  other  questions  agitated,  as 
those  about  residence,  and  the  jurisdiction  of  bishops,  there 
was  a  division  of  the  clergy  into  two  parties,  the  pontificii,  or 
patrons  of  papal  despotism,  on  one  side,  and  those  on  the 
other,  who  maintained,  that  the  bishops  had  a  divine  right  to 
a  share  in  the  jurisdiction.  But  in  the  struggle  between  the 
spiritual  power  and  the  temporal,  the  ambassadours  had  the 
whole  council  for  antagonists.  Both  the  contending  factions 
were  united  on  this  head.  It  had  been,  indeed,  uniformly 
the  policy  of  Rome  to  exert  herself  in  supporting  the  at- 
tempts, made  in  every  country,  to  draw  both  power  and  pro- 
perty out  of  the  hands  of  the  laity  into  those  of  the  clergy. 
When  this  was  once  effected,  she  was  never  at  a  loss  for  ex- 
pedients, whereby  she  might  again  draw  the  whole,  or  the 
greater  part,  out  of  their  hands  into  her  own.  By  the  first, 
she  secured  in  her  interest  the  clergy  of  every  nation,  and  laid 
the  foundation  of  such  a  close  dependance  on  herself,  as  ren- 
dered the  exertion  necessary  for  obtaining  the  second  object 
much  easier,  than  what  had  been  employed  for  obtaining  the 
first. 

To  adduce  some  instances  :  with  what  infinite  labour  and 
contention  did  the  pope,  aided  by  the  bishops,  (always  ready, 
at  his  instigation,  to  rebel  against  the  civil  powers)  wrest  the 
investitures  in  church  livings  out  of  the  hands  of  princes,  in 
order,  as  appeared  at  the  time,  to  restore  them  to  the  chap- 
ters of  the  several  dioceses  ;  and  with  v/hat  ease,  compara- 
tively, w^ere  the  chapters  afterwards  wormed  out  of  that  right 
by  the  pope  ?  First,  he  employed  the  gentler  method  of  re- 
commendation. When  this  was  ineffectual,  he  commanded. 
As  even  commands  were  sometimes  disregarded,  he  proceed- 
ed to  cause  his  commands  to  be  conveyed  by  nuncios,  empow- 
ered to  give  collation,  if  necessary  ;  and  armed  with  the 
highest  censures  against  the  disobedient.  Thus  the  clergy 
found,  to  their  cost,  that  the  last   errour  was  worse  than  the 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  Sif 

first,  and  that,  under  the  appearance  of  recovering  their  li- 
berty, they  had  brought  themselves  (as  is  often  deservedly  the 
case  with  rebels)  into  greater  bondage.  The  monarch  had 
commonly  some  regard  to  the  merits  of  the  candidate.  The 
pope  acknowledged  no  merit  but  that  of  a  weighty  purse. 
Natives  were  formerly  preferred,  now  often  aliens  and  stran- 
gers, who  could  not  speak  the  language.  Thus  Roman  cour- 
tiers, minions  of  the  pontiff,  men  who  resided  constantly  in 
Italv,  frequently  drew  the  richest  benefices  of  distant  coun- 
tries, whilst  the  duties  of  the  charge  lay  neglected.  We  have 
another  example  in  the  monks,  who,  at  first,  under  pretence 
of  vowed  poverty,  acquired  great  credit  with  the,  publick,  as 
aiming  at  no  temporal  advantage,  but  doing  all  through  cha- 
rity, for  the  service  of  the  people.  Afterwards,  when  their 
credit  was  fully  established,  Rome  quickly  devised  reasons  for 
dispensing  with  their  vow.  From  that  time  they  enriched 
themselves.  When  they  were  become  opulent,  the  pope  treat- 
ed them  as  he  treated  bishopricks  ;  bestowed  them  on  his 
favourites,  sold  them  to  the  highest  bidder,  or  gave  them  in 
commendam.  Rome  always  asserted  resolutely,  and,  in  most 
cases,  successfully,  the  clergy's  right  of  exemption  from  be- 
ing taxed  by  the  secular  powers  ;  but  it  was  in  order  to  slip 
into  the  place  of  those  powers,  and  assume  the  prerogative  of 
taxing  them  herself.  This,  though  always  controverted  by 
temporal  rulers,  she  so  effectually  secured,  that  sovereigns^, 
in  any  remarkable  exigency,  especially  when  they  could  plead 
some  holy  enterprise,  such  as  a  crusade  for  the  massacre  of 
infidels  or  hereticks,  were  fain  to  recur  to  the  pope,  as  the 
easiest  and  surest  way  of  obtaining  the  assistance  of  their 
own  clergy.  This  also  gave  the  pope  an  easy  method  of  brib- 
ing princes  to  his  side,  when  he  wanted  to  destroy  or  mortify 
any  adverse  power.  It  was  his  usual  game,  to  ply  the  bishop 
against  the  king.  But  this,  when  his  subalterns  proved  mu- 
tinous, he  could  successfully  reverse,  and  ply  the  king 
against  the  bishop.  At  the  time  of  this  very  council,  he  was 
forced  to  recur  to  these  artifices.  Both  the  Spanish  clergy 
and  the  Freitich,  having  proved  refractor)^,  on  the  article  of 
episcopal  jurisdiction,  his  holiness  did  not  find  it  a  fruitless 
expedient,  for  preventing  their  obtaining  the  countenance  and 
support  of  their  respective  sovereigns,  to  give  hopes  to  the 
latter,  of  the  aids  solicited  from  him,  for  extirpating  heres)', 
and  securing  the  catholick  faith,  namely,  the  tenths  of  the 
ecclesiastick  revenues,  in  their  own  dominions. 

Thus  I  have,  in  this  and  the  two  preceding  lectures,  given 
you  a  sketch  of  the  state  at  which  the  papal  authority  was  ar- 
rived in  the  sixteenth  century,  at  the  time  of  the  witting  of 


318  LECTURES  ON 

the  council  of  Trent,  the  last  which,  under  the  name  of 
ecumenical,  (though  not  universally  received  even  by  the  Ro- 
man Catholicks)  has  been  holden  in  the  church,  I  have  also 
given  you  some  idea  of  the  different  sentiments  on  this  arti- 
cle, entertained  by  different  parties  of  Romanists  ;  for,  on 
this  subject,  and  on  some  others,  they  are  far  from  being  una- 
nimous. I  shall  now  add  a  few  things  on  the  present  state 
of  the  hierarchy,  in  regard  to  the  form,  particularly  on  the 
dignity  and  office  of  cardinal,  which  has  naturally  sprung  up 
out  of  the  changes  gradually  effected  in  the  constitution  of  the 
Roman  church,  in  respect  both  of  the  extent  of  her  dominion, 
and  of  the  exaltation  of  her  power,  concluding  with  some  ac- 
count of  the  manner  in  which  the  hierarch  was  wont  to  be  in- 
stalled in  his  sublime  station. 

As  to  the  office  of  cardinal,  there  can  be  no  doubt,  that  for 
several  hundred  years,  there  was  no  appearance  in  the  church 
either  of  the  name  or  of  the  thing.  Though  some  other  ac- 
counts have  been  given  of  its  origin  less  honourable  for  the 
office,  what  appears  to  me  the  most  plausible  is  the  following. 

When  the  distinction  of  patriarchs  and  metropolitans,  and 
their  suffragans,  came  to  be  established,  it  naturally  gave  rise 
to  some  distinction  in  the  presbyters  and  deacons  of  the  ar- 
chiepiscopal  churches,  whether  patriarchal  or  metropolitical, 
from  the  presbyters  and  deacons  of  the  ordinary,  that  is,  of 
the  suffragan  bishops.  The  dignity'  of  an  archiepiscopal  see, 
as  it  raised  its  bishop  above  the  other  bishops  of  the  province, 
would  readily  be  conceived  to  confer  some  share  of  superiori- 
ty, at  least  in  honour  and  precedency,  on  the  presbyters  and 
deacons  belonging  to  it,  above  the  presbyters  and  deacons  of 
the  subordinate  bishopricks  of  the  province.  The  former 
were  counsellors  and  assessors  to  a  man,  who  had  a  certain 
jurisdiction  over  those  to  whom  the  latter  were  counsellors 
and  assessors.  In  consequence  of  this,  the  presbyters  and 
deacons,  which  constitute  what,  in  the  primitive  church,  was 
called  the  presbytery,  or  bishop's  senate,  came  to  be  denomi- 
nated in  some  capital  cities,  where  the  primates  resided,  (for 
the  custom  was  neither  universal  nor  confined  to  Rome)  car- 
dinal presbyters  and  cardinal  deacons,  that  is,  according  to 
the  original  import  of  the  name,  chief,  or  principal  presbyters 
and  deacons  ;  being  accounted  such  when  compared  with  their 
comprovincials  of  the  same  order.  But  still  the  more  essen- 
tial difference  of  the  orders  deacon,  presbyter  and  bishop,  was 
sacredly  preserved.  Thus  a  cardinal  deacon,  though  superi- 
our  to  the  other  provincial  deacons,  was  held  inferiour  to  an 
ordinary  provincial  presbyter,  and  a  cardinal  presbyter,  though 
superiour  to  the  other  provincial  presbyters,  was  inferiour  to 


KeCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  319 

a  suffragan  bishop.  Accordingly,  in  the  most  noted  councils 
held  at  Rome,  we  find,  that  the  cardinal  Roman  priests  al- 
ways signed  under  the  Italian  bishops.  Nor  did  anv  bishop 
then  accept  at  Rome  the  office  of  cardinal  priest,  though  it  be 
not  uncommon  now  for  those  who  are  bishops  in  other  cities, 
to  be  priests  or  deacons  in  the  Roman  conclave. 

As  gradually  a  number  of  titles,  that  had  before  been  enjoy- 
ed by  many,  were  engrossed  by  Rome,  whose  supereminence 
came  in  process  of  time,  to  swallow  up  all  other  distinctions  ;  as 
the  term  pope^  and  the  epithets  most  blessed.,  most  holy  ^  which  had, 
for  several  centuries,  been  attributed  to  all  bishops,  at  least  to 
all  patriarchs  and  metropolitans,  were  arrogated  by  Rome,  as 
belonging  peculiarly  to  her  pontiff ;  so  the  title  cardinal  was, 
from  the  like  principle,  assumed  as  belonging  peculiarly  to  her 
clergy.  Yet  it  remained  at  Ravenna  till  the  year  154-3,  when 
it  was  abrogated  by  Paul  III.  Indeed,  as  the  Roman  see  rose 
in  power  and  riches,  the  revenues  of  all  belonging  to  it  rose  in 
proportion,  and  the  patrimony  annexed  to  a  deaconship  in 
Rome  was  far  more  considerable,  than  the  revenue  of  an  or- 
dinary bishoprick  in  the  provinces.  And  if  such  was  the  case 
with  the  deacons,  we  may  be  assured,  that  not  only  no  pro- 
vincial bishop,  but  very  few  metropolitans,  were  able  to  vie  in 
splendour  and  magnificence  with  a  Roman  presbyter. 

Exorbitant  wealth  annexed  to  offices  may  be  said  universally 
to  produce  two  effects.  There  are  singular  exceptions  ;  but 
these  cannot  affect  the  general  truth.  I'he  two  effects  are, 
arrogance  and  laziness.  When  the  priests  of  Rome  were 
made  petty  princes,  one  might  be  assured,  they  would  be  no 
longer  officiating  priests.  Opulence  is  never  at  a  loss  to  find 
expedients  for  devolving  the  burden  of  the  incumbent  service 
on  others  shoulders.  Another  effect  is  arrogance.  When 
Roman  presbyters  and  deacons  could  live  in  greater  pomp  and 
magnificence  than  most  bishops,  or  even  archbishops  could 
afford  to  do,  they  would  soon  learn  to  assume  a  state  and  supe- 
riority in  other  respects  unsuited  to  the  different  functions. 
Accordingly  we  find,  that  in  the  three  last  councils  of  note, 
to  wit,  Pisa,  Constance,  and  Trent,  there  were  many  and  warm 
complaints  on  the  haughtiness,  and  even  insolence  of  these  new 
dignitaries,  who  affected  to  be  styled  the  princes  of  the  church, 
and  who  thought  themselves  well  entitled  to  this  distinction. 
For  they  were  both  the  electors  and  the  counsellors  of  the  sove- 
reign pontiff,  and  had  got  it  pretty  well  established,  that  in 
every  vacancy  one  of  their  college  should  be  chosen  pontiff. 
It  could  not  easily,  for  some  time,  be  relished,  that  those  whos, 
by  canonical  rules,  belonged  to  a  lower  order,  as  priests  and 
deacons,  sboald  treat  the  greatest  prelates  in  the;  church  as 


^20  LECTURES   ON 

their  inferiours  and  vassals.  The  honourable  distinctions 
conferred  on  them  by  popes  still  widened  the  distance.  They 
got  the  red  hat  from  Innocent  IV,  in  1244.  Paul  II  added 
the  red  cap  and  scarlet  housings ;  and  Urban  VIII,  in  the  last 
century,  dignified  them  with  the  title  of  eminence. 

At  the  same  time  it  must  be  observed,  on  the  other  handj 
in  excuse  of  their  uncommon  exaltation,  that  when  the  bishop 
of  Rome,  that  is,  the  pastor  of  a  single  diocese,  or,  as  it  was 
still  more  properly  called  at  first,  a  single  parish,  a  single 
church,  or  congregation,  was  risen  insensibly  into  the  head  of 
the  church  universal,  or,  at  least,  the  greater  part  of  it ;  and 
when  his  presbytery,  that  is,  his  small  consistory  of  colleagues 
and  ministers,  who  assisted  him  in  conducting  the  affairs  of  the 
parish,  was,  by  the  same  insensible  degrees,  advanced  into  the 
senate  by  whose  assistance  and  consultations  the  affairs  of  the 
whole  church  were  to  be  conducted,  the  members  must,  of 
necessity,  become  men  of  another  sort  of  importance.  This 
gave  rise  to  the  consequences  I  have  mentioned,  and  these 
again  gave  rise  to  regulations  in  which  (unless  men's  view  had 
been  to  overturn  the  fabrick  of  the  hierarchy  altogether,  and 
bring  things  back  to  their  primitive  model)  it  was  proper,  and 
even  nesessary,  to  consider  more  what  the  office  of  cardinal 
then  was,  than  what  it  originally  had  been  when  the  church  of 
Rome  was  no  more  than  the  church  of  Corinth,  or  any  other 
christian  congregation. 

At  different  periods  there  have  been  made  changes,  both  in 
the  number  of  the  members  of  this  college,  and  in  their  func- 
tions. The  footing  whereon  it  now  stands  is  this  :  the  con- 
clave, which  is  the  name  of  the  court  constituted  by  the  car- 
dinals, consists  of  seventy  members,  exclusively  of  the  pope 
their  head.  Of  these  there  are  six  bishops  ;  for  though  this 
could  not  have  been  from  the  beginning,  or  rather  from  the 
time  that  the  distinction  between  bishop  and  presbyter  was 
first  settled  ;  for  then  no  more  than  one  bishop  was  allowed 
to  one  church,  it  was  not  unreasonable,  to  have  also  some  of  this 
order  in  the  number,  when  it  was  no  longer  the  presbytery  of 
a  single  church,  but  the  privy  council  of  the  monarch  for  the 
management  of  the  whole.  There  are  fifty  priests,  and  four- 
teen deacons.  They  are,  on  occasion  of  vacancy  by  death, 
nominated  by  the  pope,  and  may  be  of  any  country  whatever. 
That  they  should  be,  as  much  as  possible,  taken  from  the  dif- 
ferent countries  of  Christendom,  or  rather,  the  different  Ro- 
man catholick  countries,  since  they  have  a  share  in  the  govern- 
ment of  the  whole  Roman  catholick  church,  is  entirely  suitable, 
and  is  now  in  a  manner  established  by  custom. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  32t 

But  the  very  great  alterations  made  in  this  college,  or 
society,  are  a  demonstration  of  the  prodigious  change  that 
krose  in  the  nature  and  destination  of  the  office.  The  bishop 
bf  Rome,  for  several  ages  after  the  time  of  Constantine,  was 
elected,  as  most  others  were,  by  the  presbytery,  that  is,  the 
officiating  clergy  within  the  bishop's  cure,  and  by  the  people 
of  Rome,  which,  with  the  concurrence  of  the  com-provincial 
bishops,  and  the  emperour's  ratification,  were  always  sufficient 
for  settling  their  proesid^  or  president,  as  he  was  frequently 
denominated.  Indeed,  for  an  office  of  such  immense  wealth 
and  eminence,  as  it  quickly  rose  to,  after  the  establishment  of 
Christianity,  the  election  continued  too  long  in  such  improper 
hands.  The  consequence  was  that  for.  some  centuries  the  choice 
of  a  bishop  was  almost  as  necessarily  attended  with  a  civil  war 
in  Rome,  as  that  of  a  king  was  in  Poland.  The  election  is 
now  in  none  of  the  societies  it  was  in  formerly.  The  officiat- 
ing priests,  who  serve  the  several  cures  in  Rome,  with  their 
subordinate  ministers  or  deacons,  have  no  concern  in  it.  As 
little  has  any  temporal  monarch,  the  bishops  of  the  provinces, 
br  the  Roman  people.  And  though  the  conclave  may  be  said 
to  have  sprung  out  of  the  presbytery,  yet,  by  a  thousand  suc- 
cessive alterations,  they  are  at  length  so  completely  changed, 
that,  except  the  election  of  the  pope,  there  is  not  one  office 
they  have  in  common;  and  even  this,  when  examined  critically. 
Is  no  otherwise  the  same  but  in  name.  The  ancient  presby- 
tery's concern  was  only  in  giving  a  pastor  to  the  Romans,  the 
modern  conclave's  concern  is  in  giving  a  sovereign  to  the 
church. 

I.  need  not  mention  the  expedients  that  have  been  devised, 
by  pluralities,  bishopricks  in  commendam,  and  the  like,  for 
increasing  the  splendour  and  luxury  of  those  princes  of  the 
church  and  electors  of  its  moiirirch.  In  the  time  of  a  vacancy 
in  the  papal  chair,  the  practice  is  now,  that  all  the  cardinals  in 
Rome  are  shut  up  together  in  a  place  called,  from  this  usage, 
the  conclave^  where  they  are  to  remain  (there  being  all  neces- 
sary accommodation  for  them)  till  they  elect  a  pontiff".  Car- 
dinals, who  arrive  before  before  the  election  is  over,  are 
enclosed  with  the  rest.  They  give  their  votes  by  ballot. 
And  if,  upon  scrutiny,  none  of  the  candidates  has  two  thirds 
of  the  votes,  the  balloting  must,  after  a  stated  interval,  be  re- 
peated. And  this  continues  to  be  reiterated,  if  they  should 
remain  shut  up  for  years,  always  till  one  of  them  attains  the 
superiority  I  mentioned. 

It  may  not  be  amiss  to  subjoin  here,  the  description  of  the 
pope's  consecration,  given  by  cardinal  Rasponi,  in  his  book 
concerning  the  church  of  the  Lateran,  which  is  also  related  by 

%  s 


LECTURES  on 

la:ther  Bonanni,  in  his  medalUck  history  of  the  popes,  and  by 
jLenfant,  in  his  history  of  tht  council  of  Constance.  "  Before 
*'  the  usage  of  the  conclave  was  introduced  by  Gregory  the 
"  tenth,"  says  cardinal  Rasponi,  "  the  cardinals,  three  days 
*'  after  the  obsequies  of  the  former  pope,  convened  in  the  La- 
f  tergn  church,  where,  after  the  invocation  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
^'  and  the  celebration  of  mass,  they  proceed  to  the  election  of 
*'  a  pope.  The  election  being  made,  the  first  cardinal  deacon 
"  invested  the  pope  elect  in  his  pontifical  habits,  and  announc- 
"  ed  the  name  which  he  chose  to  take  :"  for  it  has  been  the 
custom  now,  for  several  centuries,  that  the  pope  should  assume 
a  new  name  on  being  elected.  "  Afterwards,  two  cardinals, 
*'  the  most  eminent  in  dignity,  one  on  his  right  hand,  the 
."  other  on  his  left,  conducted  him  to  the  altar,  where  he  pro- 
*'  strated  himself  in  adoration  of  God,  whilst  they  sang  the  Te 
"  Deum.  After  the  Te  Deum^  the  cardinals  seated  the  pope 
."  in  a  marble  chair,  which  was  behind  the  altar,  under  a  sort 
"  of  dome,  or  vault,  where  the  pope,  being  set,  admitted  the 
"  cardinals,  the  bishops,  and  some  others,  to  kiss  his  feet,  and 
^'  to  receive  the  kiss  of  peace.  Then  the  pope  rising,  the  car- 
"  dinals  conducted  him  through  the  portico  to  another  chair, 
"  bored  like  what  is  called  in  French,  selle  percee.  This 
"  chair  was  thence  very  properly  named  stercoraria.,  the  ster- 
**  corary.  It  was  formerly  placed  before  the  portico  of  the 
*'  patriarchal  basilick,  and  is  now  to  be  seen  in  the  cloister  of 
«■'  that  basilick.  The  use  of  these  chairs,  however,  was  after- 
"  wards  abolished  by  Leo  the  tenth,  probably  for  this,  amongst 
*'  other  reasons,  because  the  perforated  chair  was  become  con- 
"  nected  with  the  fabulous  story  of  the  female  pope.  That, 
^'  however,  is  not  aprotestant  fable,  as  some  persons  ignorantly 
^'  pretend,  for  it  was  current  long  before  the  days  of  Luther. 
"  Bat  the  continuance  of  the  use  of  that  chair  preserved  the 
I'  memory  of  the  story,  and  might  appear  to  the  credulous  an 
4'  evidence  of  its  truth.  Whilst  the  pope  sat  on  the  stercorary, 
«'  the  choir  sang  these  words  of  scripture  ;  Suscitat  de  pulvere 
*'  egenum,  et  de  stercore  erigit  pauperem,  ut  sedeat  cum  prin- 
«  cipibus,  et  solium  glorite  teneat.  Psalm  cxiii,  7.  The  la&t 
"  clause  is  not  in  the  Psalm.  He  raiseth  the  poor  out  of  the 
f  dust^  and  Uftelh  the  needy  off  the  dunghill^  that  he  may  set  hinj^ 
«  with  the  princes  of  his  people^  and  that  he  may  possess  the 
t'  throne  of  glory.  The  intention  of  this  ceremony,  it  was 
"  said,  was  to  insinuate  to  the  pope  the  need  there  is  of  the 
"  virtue  of  humility,  vmich  otight  to  be  the  first  step  of  his 
«  greatness.  After  remaining  some  time  in  this  chair,  the 
"  pope  received  from  the  hands  of  the  chamberlain  three  de- 
"  niers,  which  he  threw  to  the   people,  pronouncing  these 


ECCLESrAStiCAL  fllSTORY.  S^S 

■^'^  words :  Silver  and  gold  I  have  none  for  niy  pleasure  ^^  but  vjhat 
**  /  have  I  give  you.  Afterwards,  the  prior  of  the  Lateran' 
"  basilick,  and  one  of  the  cardinals,  or  one  of  the  canons  of 
*'  that  basilick,  took  the  pope  between  thein,  and  whilst  they 
"  walked  in  the  portico,  shouts  of  acclamation  were  raised 
"  near  the  basilick,  and  the  election  was  declared,  with  the 
*'  name  which  the  pope  had  taken.  In  this  manner  they  con- 
*'  ducted  the  pope  to  the  basilick  of  St.  Sylvester,  where,  be- 
''  ing  placed  before  this  basilick  in  a  chair  of  porphyry,  the 
*'  prior  of  the  basilick  put  into  his  hands  a  ferula^-  in  sign  of 
*'  correction  and  government,  and  the  keys,  to  denote  the 
*'  power  which  God  gave  to  St.  Peter,  Prince  of  the  aposdes, 
*'  of  opening  and  shutting,  of  binding  and  loosing,  and  which 
*'  passes  (according  to  our  historian)  successively  to  all  the' 
*'  Roman  pontiffs.  Thence  the  pope,  carrying  the  ferula!,  and 
*'  the  keys,  went  to  place  himself  in  another  chair,  reseniblihg 
*'  the  former;  and  after  remaining  there  some  tixne,  restored 
*'  the  ferula  and  the  kevs  to  the  prior,  who  girt  him  with  a 
*  girdle  of  red  silk,  giving  him  a  parse  of  the  same  colour  and 
'  stuff,  wherein  there  were  twelve  precious  stones,  and  a  small 
'  bit  of  musk.  Onuphrius,  in  his  treatise  on  the  basilick  of 
*'  the  Lateran,  says,  that  it  was  the  prior  of  this  basilick  who 
*'  gave  these  things  to  the  pope.  His  sitting  in  the  two  chairs^ 
*'  denoted  the  primacy  which  St.  Peter  conlerred  on  him,  and 
*'  the  power  of  preaching  the  gospel  conferred  by  St.  PauU 
*'  The  girdle  signified  continence  and  chastity,  the  purse  de- 
*'  noted  the  treasure,  out  of  which  the  poor  were  to  be  nourish- 
*'  ed,  the  twelve  precious  stones  represented  the  power  of 
"  the  twelve  apostles,  which  resides  totally  in  the  potitiH'; 
*'  in  fine,  the  musk  denoted  the  fragrancy  of  good  works^ 
*'  according  to  that  saying,  We  are  to  God  a  sxvevt  savour 
**  of  Christ.  In  this  chair  the  pope  elect  admitted  the  mi- 
*'  nisters  of  the  palace  the  to  kiss  his  feet,  and  to  receive 
*'  the  kiss  of  peace.  There,  too,  several  pieces  of  silver  werd 
*'  delivered  to  him  by  the  chamberlain,  to  the  value  of  teii 
*'  pence.  These  he  threw  to  the  people  at  three  diiTererit 
**  times,  pronouncing  these  words,  He  hath  scattered ;  he  haih 
^^  given  to  the  poor  ;  his  righteousness  remaihetli  for  esoer.  All 
"  this  being  done,  the  pope  elect  went  next  Sn.ndaY,  attended 
*'  by  all  the  orders  of  the  sacred  palace,  and  the  principal  pt^o- 
*'  pie  of  the  city,  to  the  basilick  of  the  Vatican,  and  therf^,  be- 
"  fore  the  confession  of  St.  Peter,  he  was  solemnly  consecrated 
*'  by  the  bishop  of  Ostia,  to  whom  this  office  speciall\  i^elongs. 
**  After  this  function,  the  archdeacon  and  the  second  deacori 
*'  gave  the  pall  to  the  pope,  the  archdeacon  prdnciuncing  these 
*'  words,  Receive  the  pall,  which  is  the  plenitude  ofthcpo)itififal 


324  LECTURES  ON 

*'  office^  to  the  honour  of  Almighty  God^  of  the  most  happy  virgin 
*'  his  mother^  oj  the  biest,ed  apostles  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  and 
*'  of  the  holy  Roman  church?"* 

After  this  description,  cardinal  Rasponi  adds  these  words : 
— "  This  is  what  was  done  when  the  pontiff  was  announced 
*•■  or  proclaimed  in  the  church  of  the  Lateran  ;  but  when  the 
"  election  was  made  in  the  Vatican,  the  pope,  immediately  af- 
*'  ter  being  conducted  to  the  aitar  by  tv/o  cardinals,  or  after 
*'  having  performed  his  adoration,  and  offered  a  secret  prayer, 
*'  kneeling,  was  placed  in  a  chair  behind  the  altar,  where  he 
*'  admitted  the  cardinal  bishops,  and  the  others,  during  the 
"  singing  of  the  Te  Deum^  to  kiss  his  feet,  and  to  receive  the 
*'  kiss  of  peace.  The  following  Sunday  they  assembled  in  the 
*'  same  church,  and  the  pope,  crov/ntd  according  to  the  cus- 
*'  torn  of  his  ancestors,  Avent  to  the  Lateran  palace  ;  but  before 
*'  entering  it,  he  seated  himself  in  the  stercorary^  where,  sitting 
"  down  thrice,  according  to  custom,  he  was  introduced  by  the 
*'  cardinals  into  the  basilick,  distributing  nioney  to  the  popu- 
*'  lace.  There  he  ascended  a  throne  behind  die  altar,  where 
''  he  admitted  the  canons  of  the  basilick  to  kiss  his  feet,  and 
*'  to  receive  the  kiss  of  peace :  which  being  done,  he  went  to 
*'  place  himself  in  the  chairs  that  were  before  the  oratory  of 
*'  St.  Silvester,  where  all  was  performed  that  has  been  recited 
*'  above.  But  if  it  happened  that  the  pope  was  created  out  of 
*'  Rome,  all  the  clergy,  when  he  made  hxs  entry  into  that  city, 
*'  and  before  entering  the  gate  ol  the  Lateran,  went  to  meet 
"  him  without  the  gate,  in  pontifical  habits,  vvith  the  standard 
*'  of  the  cross  and  censers  ;  and,  entering  thus  into  the  Lateran 
"  church,  they  observed,  though  in  an  order  somewh-t  dif- 
*'  ferent,  all  the  ceremonies  mencioued  above.  And  if  »ne 
*'  pope,  coming  to  Rome  after  his  consecration,  went  to  ihe 
*'  church  of  St.  Peter,  the  same  rites  M-ere  .jsed  there  as  in 
*'  the  Lateran  church,  except  only  that  he  did  not  receive  ihe 
<'  canons  of  St.  Peter  to  kiss  his  feet  iathe  portico,  and  r')at 
"  he  did  not  sit  dov/n  on  the  stercorary^  xvhich  is  not  in  that 
*'  church.  For  this  reason,  the  next  da)  after  mass,  he  vvent 
*'  without  the  tiara  to  the  Lateran  pabre,  and  before  enter'ng 
<'  the  basi^-ick,  he  placed  himself  on  the  stercorary,  with  the 
**  accustomed  ceremonies." 

These  ceremonies,  it  must  be  owned,  appear  to  us  very  silly, 
and  some  of  them  absolutely  ridiculous.  But  you  may  depend 
on  it,  that  there  is  neither  exaggeration  nor  misrepresentation 
in  the  account  above  given.  It  is  not  given  by  an  enemy  to 
that  profession,  or  by  a  stranger  to  the  custom?  used  on  such 
occasions,  who  could  relate  them  only  from  hearsay.  It  is  a 
relation  given  by  a  friend,  a  cardinal  too,  one  who  had  proba- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  321 

bly  witnessed  them  oftener  than  once,  and  who  had  himself  a 
principal  part  to  act  on  those  occasions.  The  ceremonies  of 
consecration  as  bishop,  in  case  the  pope  elect  had,  previously 
to  his  election,  been  only  in  priest's  or  deacon's  orders,  have 
not  been  related  by  the  cardinal,  as  not  differing  materially 
from  those  used  in  the  ordination  of  bishops,  which  are  to  be 
found  in  the  Roman  pontifical.  There  was,  besides,  a  cere- 
mony of  coronation  used  in  the  instalment  of  the  popes,  which 
seems  not  to  have  been  introduced  earlier  than  the  thirteenth 
century ;  and  it  was  in  the  following  century,  the  fourteenth, 
that  the  triple  crown  was  devised.  Benedict  the  twelfth  seems 
to  have  been  the  first  pope  that  wore  it.  The  reasons  which 
the  canonists  give  for  the  use  of  the  triple  crown  are  so  di- 
verse, and  so  fantastick,  that  it  is  not  worth  while  to  report 
them. 

The  rites  employed  in  coronation  I  shall  give  you  some 
notion  of,  from  the  account  given  by  Lenfant,  in  his  history 
of  the  council  of  Constance,  of  the  coronation  of  Martin  the 
fifth,  created  pope  in  a  peculiar  manner,  agreed  on  by  that 
council,  in  the  room  of  John  the  twenty-third,  whom  they  had 
deposed.  "  There  was  erected  in  the  court  of  the  palace," 
says  our  historian,  "  a  grand  theatre,  which  could  contain 
*'  about  a  hundred  persons.  Close  to  the  wall  was  a  very 
"  high  throne,  above  which  there  was  a  canopy  of  cloth  of 
*'  gold,  the  seat  destined  for  his  holiness.  On  the  right  hand, 
*'  and  on  the  left,  were  ranged  several  other  seats,  a  little 
*'  lower,  but  magnificent,  for  the  princes  and  the  prelates  to  sit 
*'  on.  At  eight  o'clock  in  the  morning,  the  two  patriarchs, 
*'  (for  since  the  time  of  the  crusades,  they  had  got  titular 
"  Latin  patriarchs  in  the  eastern  patriarchal  sees  subdued  by 
*'  the  Mahometans)  the  twenty-two  cardinals,  (for  there  were 
*'  no  more  then  present)  the  archbishops,  the  bishops,  the 
*'  mitred  abbots,  entered  the  court  of  the  palace,  on  horseback, 
*'  in  pontifical  habits.  The  emperour,  and  the  other  princes, 
*'  followed  on  foot.  When  all  the  people  were  assembled,  the 
*'  pope  mounted  the  theatre,  preceded  by  the  clergy,  carrying 
"  the  cross  and  waxen  tapers.  On  the  forepart  of  the  theatre 
"  there  was  an  excellent  choir  of  musick,  which  sang  and 
*'  played  on  all  sorts  of  instruments.  The  pope  had  on  his 
*'  head  a  superb  tiara,  seeded  with  gold  crowns,  with  a  golden 
"  cross  on  the  top.  At  his  right  hand,  a  little  behind,  were 
"  cardinal  Viviers,  and  a  patriarch  ;  at  his  left,  cardinal  Bran- 
"  cas,  with  another  patriarch.  Then  marched  the  other  car- 
*'  dinals,  and  the  grand  master  of  Rhodes,  who  were  all  re- 
"  ceived  by  the  emperour,  the  electors,  and  the  princes.  The 
*'  pope  being  placed  on  the  throne,  the  patriarch  of  Antioch 


326  E.ECTURES  ON^ 

*'  took  his  tiafa^  or  crown,  off  his  head,  and  kneeled  before 
"  him,  holding  this  crown  in  his  hand.  Near  him  other  car- 
"  dinals  kneeled  also  ;  one  of  whom  carried  some  tow  ai  the 
*'  end  of  a  stick,  another  a  cross,  and  the  rest  wax  tapers.  At 
*'  the  pope's  right  hand  sat  cardinal  de  Brancas,  with  eight 
*'  other  cardinals  ;  at  his  left,  the  grand  master  of  Rhodes, 
*'  with  eight  cardinals.  Next  them,  on  the  right,  the  empe- 
*'  rour,  on  the  left,  the  elector  of  Brandenburg,  both  attended 
*'  by  archbishops.  Next  them,  electors,  princes,  bishops,  and 
*'  other  prelates,  as  many  as  the  place  could  contain.  The 
*'  rest  sat  on  the  stairs,  which  had  been  made  very  wide  for 
"  the  purpose.  There  was,  beside  these,  in  the  court,  a  great 
"  number  of  archbishops,  bishops,  and  other  greai  lords,  both 
*'  ecclesiastick  and  secular,  who  surrounded  the  theatre  on 
*'  horseback*  There  was,  likewise,  an  immense  crowd  of 
"  people,  who  could  not  get  mto  the  court.  When  the  musick 
"  had  ceased,  one  of  the  cardinals,  who  was  kneeling  before 
"  the  pope,  and  who  carried  the  tow,  lighted  it,  and  twice 
"  said  aloud,  addressing  himself  to  the  pope  Sancte  pater ^  sic 
*'  transit  gloria  mundi.  After  which,  three  cardinals,  who 
*'  had  been  selected  for  putting  the  crown  on  the  pope's 
*'  head,  standing  up  with  the  grand  master  of  Rhodes,  and 
**  taking  the  crown  from  the  hands  of  the  pope,  they  all  four 
*'  kneeled  on  the  highest  step  of  the  throne,  whence,  after 
"  saying  a  prayer,  they  arose,  and  put  the  crown  on  the 
*'  pope's  head  :  after  which,  resuming  their  former  places 
**  they  heard  the  Te  Deum,  and  the  musick.  When  they  left 
**  the  place,  the  pope  mounted  his  white  horse,  which  was  pre- 
"  ceded  by  three  led  horses,  that  were  also  white,  and  had 
"  red  caparisons.  The  inferiour  clergy  walked  before,  followed 
**  by  the  abbots,  bishops,  archbishops,  and  cardinals,  on  horse- 
*'  back.  The  emperour,  on  foot,  held  the  reins  of  the  pope's 
"  bridle  on  the  right,  walking  in  the  dirt,  (which  is  particu- 
*'  larly  observed  by  the  historian)  whilst  the  elector  of  Bran- 
*'  denburg  did  the  same  on  the  left.  Thus  the  pope  was 
*'  carried  in  procession  from  the  cathedral  to  the  Augustin 
**  monastery,  and  thence  reconducted  to  the  episcopal  palace. 
''  Here  ended  the  ceremony."  And  here  shall  end  our  ac- 
count of  the  rise  and  establishment  of  papal  dominion. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  afr 


LECTURE  XXIII. 


JpLAVING  now  given  you  some  account  ol*  the  rise  and  e&* 
jabiishment  of  the  Romish  hierarchy,  it  is  but  reasonable, 
that  before  I  dismiss  the  subject  of  ecclesiastick  history,  I 
^hould  consider  the  causes  which  have  contributed  to  the  de- 
clension of  that  wonderful  empire.  This  will  lead  me  to  re- 
mark a  little  on  the  latent  springs,  the  progress,  and  the 
effects  of  the  reformation. 

In  all  governments,  of  what  kind  soerer,  it  may  be  justly 
said,  that  the  dominion  of  the  few  over  the  many  is  primarily 
founded  in  opinion.  The  natural  strength  among  beings  of 
the  same  order,  which  is  equal  in  the  individuals,  or  nearly 
so,  lies  always  in  the  multitude.  But  the  opinion  both  of 
right  and  of  occupancy,  or  secure  possession,  can  and  does 
universally  invest  the  smaller  with  the  direction  or  govern- 
inent  of  the  gi^eacer  number.  By  the  opinion  of  right,  we  are- 
restrained,  through  justice,  or  a  sense  of  duty,  from  divesting- 
a  man  of  what  we  think  him  entitled  to  enjoy.  By  the  opinioii 
qi  occupancy,  we  are  restrained,  through  prvidence,  or  a  sense 
of  danger,  from  disturbing  a  man  in  the  possession  of  what 
we  think  he  has  a  firm  hold  of.  Either  opinion,  when  strong, 
is  generally  sufficient  to  ensure  peace  ;  but  they  operate  most 
powerfully  in  conjunction.  When  the  two  opinions  are  dis- 
joined, that  is,  when  fortunately,  under  any  government,  it  is 
the  general  opinion,  that  the  right  is  in  one,  and  the  occupancy 
iii  another,  there  frequently  ensue  insurrections  and  intestine 
broils. 

The  above  remarks  hold  equally  with  regard  to  property, 
which  is  in  effect  a  species  of  power.  Now  these  opinions, 
which,  from  the  influence  of  custom,  and  insensible  imitation,' 


328  LECTURES  ON 

men  have  a  natural  tendency  to  form,  prove,  in  all  ordinary 
cases,  a  sufficient  security  to  the  few  rich  and  great,  in  the 
enjoyment  of  all  their  envied  advantages,  against  the  far  su- 
periour  force,  if  it  were  combined,  of  the  many  poor  and 
small.  Indeed,  it  is  opinion  that  prevents  the  combination, 
and  makes  that  a  master  may  sleep  securely  amid  fifty  servants 
and  dependents,  each  of  whom,  perhaps,  taken,  singly,  is, 
both  in  bodily  strength,  and  in  mental  abilities,  an  overmatch 
for  him.  It  is  this  which  vests  a  single  person  with  the 
command  of  an  army,  who,  in  contradiction  to  their  own 
will,  give  implicit  obedience  to  his  ;  notwithstanding  that 
they  carry  in  their  hands  what  would  prove  the  instruments  of 
working  their  own  pleasure,  and  his  destruction.  It  will  not 
be  doubted,  that  it  is  in  the  same  way,  b)^  means  of  opinion, 
that  ecclesiastical  power  has  a  hold  of  the  minds  of  men. 

There  is,  however,  this  remarkable  difference  in  the  two 
sorts  of  power,  that  knowledge  and  civilization,  unless  ac- 
companied with  profligacy  of  manners,  add  strength  to  those 
opinions  on  which  civil  authority  rests,  at  the  same  time  that 
they  weaken  those  opinions  which  serve  as  a  basis  to  a  spiri- 
tual despotism,  or  a  hierarchy  like  the  Romish.  The  more 
a  people  becomes  civilized,  the  more  their  notions  of  justice 
and  property,  prescription  and  peaceable  possession,  become 
steady,  the  more  they  see  the  necessit}'  of  maintaining  these 
inviolate,  and  the  ruinous  consequences  of  infringing  them. 
The  love  of  peace  and  science,  the  encouragement  of  indus- 
try and  arts,  the  desire  of  publick  good  and  order,  the  ab- 
horrence of  crimes,  confusion,  and  blood,  all  co-operate  to 
make  those  opinions  take  deep  root.  Nothing  seems  to  en- 
danger them  so  much  as  tyranny  and  oppression  in  the  rulers. 
These  tending  directly  to  undermine  the  opinion  of  right, 
(for  no  man  is  conceived  to  have  a  right  to  tyrannize  over  his 
fellows)  leave  only  in  the  minds  of  the  people,  in  favour  of 
their  superiours,  the  opinion  of  occupancy.  Thus  one  of  the 
great  pillars  by  which  magistracy  is  supported,  the  sense  of 
duty,  is  removed,  and  the  whole  weight  is  left  upon  the  other, 
the  sense  of  danger.  Virtue^  in  that  case,  we  consider  either 
as  out  of  the  question,  or  as  in  opposition  to  the  powers  that 
be,  and  consult  only  prudence.  Now  wherever  the  present 
evils  of  oppression,  wherein  a  people  is  involved,  appear  into- 
lerable, and  greater  than  any,  or  even  as  great  as  any  which 
they  dread  from  opposition,  the  other  support,  prudence^  is 
removed  also  ;  and  men  will  both  think  themselves  entitled  to 
revolt,  and,  after  balancing  the  chances  on  both  sides,  be  dis- 
posed to  hazard  every  thing. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  52» 

O^i  the  other  hand,  the  opinions,  which  are  the  great  bul- 
warks of  spiritual  tyranny,  are  founded  in  ignorance  arid  su- 
perstition, which  are  always  accompained  with  great  credulityi 
Of  these,  nothing  can  be  so  subversive  as  knowledge  and 
improvement.  Virtue,  and  even  piety  itself,  when  its  exalted 
and  liberal  spirit  begins  to  be  understood,  become  hostile  td 
opinions  which,  under  the  sacred  name  and  garb  of  religion^ 
prove  the  bane  of  every  virtue,  and  indeed  of  eVery  valuable 
quality  in  human  nature,  as  well  as  the  nurse  of  folly  and 
malevolence^,  Luxury  and  vice  are  often  pernicious  to  the 
best  constituted  civil  governments,  because  whilst,  on  one 
hand,  thev  strengthen  and  inflame  the  passions,  the  great  in- 
centives to  criminal  attempts,  they,  on  the  other  hand,  loosen 
and  undermine  our  regards  to  equity  and  right.  But  no  kind 
of  vice  in  the  people,  if  accompanied  with  ignorance,  is  an 
enemy  ;  every  kind  is,  on  the  contrary,  a  friend  to  the  reign 
of  superstition.  Consciousness  of  profligacy  will  at  times  ex- 
cite terroiir  even  in  the  most  obdurate.  Superstition,  especi- 
ally when  formed  into  a  politick  system,  like  the  Romish,  is 
n€ver  deficient  in  expedients  for  conjuring  down  that  terrour^ 
and  rendering  it  subservient  to  the  invariable  aim,  priestly 
dominion.  It  requires  but  little  knowledge,  in  the  history  of 
Christendom,  to  enable  us  to  discover,  that  many  of  those 
persons,  both  princes  and  others,  most  highly  celebrated  by 
ibcclesiasticks  as  the  great  benefactors  of  the  church,  were  the 
most  worthless  of  the  age  wherein  they  lived,  the  most  tyran- 
nical, the  most  rapacious,  the  most  profligate,  men  who  have: 
concluded  a  life  stained  with  the  blackest  crimes,  by  beggar- 
ing their  offspring,  and  devoting  all  that  they  had,  by  way  o^ 
atoning  for  their  sins,  to  one  of  those  seminaries  of  sloth^ 
hypocrisy,  and  unnatural  lusts,  commonly  called  convents  ;  or 
by  enchancing,  in  some  other  way,  the  power  and  wealth  of 
churchmen.  Few  contributed  more  to  the  erection  and  es- 
tablishment of  the  hierarchy  than  the  emperour  Phocas  ;  and 
a  greater  monster  of  cruelty  and  injustice  never  disgraced  the 
human  form. 

That  the  great  enemy  which  superstition  has  to  overcome  is 
knofjoledge^  was  early  perceived  by  those,  who  found  their  ac*; 
count  in  supporting  her  thronei  Nor  were  they  slack  in  tak- 
ing measures  for  stifling  this  dangerous  foe.  Among  the 
chief  of  these  measures  were  the  following :—  1st,  They 
judged  it  proper  to  confine  to  a  few  those  divine  illuminations^ 
which  they  could  not  totally  suppress,  and  which  they  could 
not  deny  had  originally  been  given  for  the  benefit  of  all.  2dly,' 
When  that  formidable  thing,  knowledge^  in  spite  of  all  their 
efforts,  was  making  progress,  they,  in  order  to  give  it  a  time^i 

T  t 


S30  LECTURES  ON 

ly  check,  affixed  a  stigma  on  all  the  books  which  tended  to  ex- 
pose their  artifices,  and  open  the  eyes  of  mankind.  3dly, 
For  the  more  effectual  prevention  of  this  danger,  through  the 
terrour  of  example,  persecution  was  employed,  which  has,  in 
their  hands,  been  digested  into  an  art,  and  conducted  with  a 
cool,  determinate,  systematick  cruelty,  that  defies  alike  all 
the  principles  of  justice  and  humanity  ;  and  of  which,  among 
Jews,  Mahometans,  or  Pagans,  the  world  has  hitherto  fur- 
nished us  with  nothing  that  deserves  to  be  compared. 

In  what  regards  the  first  method,  we  comprehend  under  it 
the  means  that  have  been  used  to  render  the  scriptures  inac- 
cessible to  the  common  people,  by  discouraging,  as  much  as 
possible,  translations  into  the  vulgar  tongue  ;  and,  by  con- 
fining the  whole  publick  service  to  a  dead  language,  thereby 
rendering  it  to  the  congregation  no  better  than  insignificant 
mummery.  Nothing  is  more  evident  from  the  scriptures 
themstlves,  than  that  they  were  written  for  the  benefit  of  all. 
Accordingly,  all  are  commanded  to  read  and  study  them. 
And  indeed,  soon  after  the  different  books  came  abroad,  one 
of  the  first  effec  s  of  the  pious  zeal,  with  which  the  primitive 
christians  were  inspired,  was,  in  every  country,  to  get  those 
inestimable  instructions,  as  soon  as  possible,  accurately 
translated  into  the  language  of  the  country.  It  is  astonishing 
to  observe  how  early  this  was  effected  in  most  of  the  langua- 
ges then  spoken.  Indeed,  there  was  nothing  in  those  purer 
times  which  could  induce  any  one,  who  bore  the  christian 
name,  to  desire  either  to  conceal,  or  to  disguise,  the  truth. 
To  propagate  it  in  its  native  purit)^,  and  thus  diffuse  to  others 
the  benefit  of  that  light  which  they  themselves  enjoyed,  was 
the  great  ambition,  and  constant  aim,  of  all  the  genuine  dis- 
ciples of  the  Lord  Jesus. 

As  no  tongue  (the  Greek  excepted,  which  is  the  original  of 
the  New  Testament)  was  of  so  great  extent  as  Latin, — into 
this  a  translation  seems  very  early  to  have  been  made.  It  was 
commonly  distinguished  by  the  name  Italick^  probably  because 
undertaken  for  the  use  of  the  christians  in  Italy.  It  is  not 
known  who  was  the  author.  This  is  also  the  case  of  most  of 
the  old  translations.  About  three  centuries  after,  a  new  ver- 
sion into  Latin  was  undertaken  by  Jerom.  Our  present  vul- 
gate  consists  partly  of  each,  but  mostly  of  the  latter.  No 
version  whatever  could,  in  early  times,  be  more  necessary 
than  one  into  Latin.  This  was  not  the  language  of  Italy  only  ; 
it  had  obtained  very  generally  in  all  the  neighbouring  coun- 
tries, which  had  long  remained  in  subjection  to  Rome,  and  in 
which  Roman  colonies  had  been  planted.  But  in  the  other 
western  churches,  where  Latin  was  n,ot  spoken  by  the  people, 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  331 

the  scriptures  were  translated  into  the  vernacular  idiom  of  the 
different  nations,  soon  after  their  embracing  the  christian  doc- 
trine. There  were,  accordingly,  Gothick,  Prankish,  or  old 
German,  Anglo-Saxon,  and  Sclavonick  versions.  In  like 
manner,  in  the  east,  they  had  very  early  Syriack,  Armenian, 
Arabick,  Persick,  Ethiopick,  and  Coptick.  The  same  may 
be  said  of  the  divine  offices,  or  prayers  and  hymns,  used  in 
publick  in  their  churches.  It  is  pretty  evident,  that  for  some 
centuries  these  were,  in  all  the  early  converted  countries,  per- 
formed in  the  language  of  the  people.  But  in  the  first  ages 
there  were  no  written  liturgies. 

Indeed,  nothing  can  be  more  repugnant  to  common  sense 
than  the  contrary  practice.  For  if  the  people  have  any  con- 
cern in  those  offices,  if  their  joining  in  the  service  be  of  any 
consequence,  it  is  necessary  they  should  understand  what  is 
done  :  in  an  unknown  tongue,  the  praises  of  God,  and  the 
praises  of  Baal,  are  the  same  to  them.  In  like  manner,  in 
regard  to  the  reading  of  the  scriptures,  if  the  edification  of 
the  people  be  at  all  concerned,  still  more  if  it  be  the  ultimate 
end,  how  can  it  be  promoted  by  the  barbarous  sounds  of  a 
foreign  or  dead  language  ?  How  can  instructions,  covered  by 
such  an  impenetrable  veil,  convey  knowledge  or  comfort,  pro- 
duce faith,  or  secure  obedience  ?  The  apostle  Paul,  (1  Cor. 
xiv,)  has  been  so  full  and  explicit  on  this  head,  that  it  is  im- 
possible for  all  the  sophistry,  that  has  been  wasted  on  that 
passage,  to  disguise  his  meaning  from  any  intelligent  and  in- 
genuous mind. 

"  The  church,"  says  the  Romanist,  "  by  this  averseness  to 
*'  change  so  much  as  the  external  garb,  the  language  of  the 
**  usages  introduced  soon  after  the  forming  of  a  christian  so- 
*'  ciety  at  Rome,  demonstrates  her  constancy,  and  inviolable 
*'  regard,  to  antiquity,  and  consequently  ought  to  inspire  us 
*'  with  a  greater  confidence  in  the  genuineness  and  identity  of 
"  her  doctrine."  But  so  far  in  fact  is  this  from  being  an  evi- 
dence of  the  constancy  of  that  church,  in  point  of  doctrine, 
that  it  is  no  evidence  of  her  constancy  even  in  point  of  cere- 
monies. It  is  the  dress,  the  language  only,  in  which  she  has 
been  constant,  the  ceremonies  themselves  have  undergone 
great  alterations,  and  received  immense  additions,  (as  those 
versed  in  church  history  well  know)  in  order  to  a  commodate 
them  to  the  corruptions  in  doctrine,  which,  from  time  to  time, 
have  been  adopted.  Nor  has  it  been  the  most  inconsidi:'ra!)le 
motive  for  preserving  the  use  of  a  dead  language,  tliat  the 
whole  service  might  be  more  completely  in  the  power  ot  the 
priesthood,  who  could  thereby,  with  the  greater  facility,  and 
without  alarming  the  people,  make  such  alterations  in  their 
liturgy,  as  should,  in  their  ghostly  wisdom,  be  judged  proper.- 


332  LECTURES  ON 

It  may  at  first  appear  a  paradox,  but  on  reflection  is  mani-^ 
fest,  that  this  mark  of  their  constancy,  in  what  regards  the 
dead  letter  of  the  sacred  ceremonies,  is  the  strongest  evidence 
of  their  mutability,  nay,  actual  change,  in  what  concerns  the 
vitals  of  religion.     Consider  the  reason  why  Latin  was  first 
employed  in  the  Italian  churches.     It  was  not  the  original 
language  of  any  part  of  sacred  writ.    They  had  the  New  Tes- 
tament in  the   original  Greek.     There  were   also  forms  of 
publick  prayer,  or  liturgies,  in  that  language,  before  any  ap- 
peared in  Latin.     What  then  could  induce  them  to  usher  into 
their  churches  a  fallible  translation  of  the  scriptures,  in  pre- 
ference to  the  original,  acknowledged  to  have  been  written  by 
men  divinely  inspired,  and  consequently  infallible  r   I  ask  this 
the  rather,  because  the  Romanist  admits,  that  the  original  was 
written  by  inspiration.     He  agrees  with  us  also,  in  not  affirm- 
ing the  same  thing  of  any  version  whatever.     For,  though  the 
council  of  Trent  has  pronounced  the   Lntin  vulgate   to  be 
authentick,  it  has  not  declared  it  perfect,  or  affirmed  that  the 
translator  was  inspired.     By  the  authenticity,  therefore,  no 
more  is  meant,  in  the  opinion  of  their  most  learned  doctors, 
than  that  it  is  a  good  translation,  and  may  be  used,  by  those 
who  understand  Latin,  safely  and  profitably.     But  that  this  is 
not  considered  by  themselves  as  signifying  that  it  is  totally 
exempt  from  errour,  is  manifest  from  this,  that  the  criticks  of 
that  communion  use  as  much  freedom  in  pointing  out  and 
correcting  its  errours,  as  the  learned  of  this  island  do,   in  re- 
gard to  the  common  English  version.  I  return  to  my  question 
therefore,   and  ask  the  Italians,  of  the  present  age.  Why  did 
their  forefathers,  in  the  early  ages,  prefer  a  Latin  version  ;  a 
performance  executed  indeed  by  pious,  but  fallible,  men,  with 
the  aid  of  human  learning,  to  the  Greek  original,  which  they 
believed  to  contain  the  unerring  dictates  of  the  Holy  Ghost  ? 
Why  was  not  the  latter  read  in  their  churches  in  preference 
to  the  former?  The  ansvver  which  they  would  return,  or  which 
at  least  their  progenitors  would  have  returned,  is  plain  and 
satisfactory.  "  We  do  not  dispute  that  the  Greek  was  in  itself 
*'  preferable  ;  but  to  our  people  it  was  useless,  because  not 
*'  understood.     Latin  was  their  mother  tongue.  Much,  there- 
*'  fore,  of  the  mird  of  the  spirit  they  might  learn  from  a  good 
*'  Latin  version,  notwithstanding  its  imperfections.     Nothing 
*'  at  all  could  they  acquire  from  hearing  the  sounds  of  a  lan- 
"  guage  with  which  they  were  unacquainted.     And  better,  as 
*'  the  apostle  says,  speak  but  five  words  with  understanding, 
*'  that  is,  intelligiblv,  or  so  as  to  teach  others,  than  ten  thou- 
"  sand,  in  an  unknown    tongue,   by  which   nobody  can    be 
*'  edified."     Nothing  can  be  more  pertinent  than  this  answer, 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  333 

with  which  Paul  has  furnished  us,  only  make  the  application 
to  the  case  in  hand.  Latin  is  not  now  your  native  tongue.  It 
is  not  at  present  the  language  of  any  nation  or  city  in  the 
world.  Your  people  understand  it  no  more  now  than  they  do 
Greek.  If  the  Romans,  sixteen  hundred  years  ago,  thought 
it  necessary  to  reject  the  publick  use  of  an  infallible  original, 
because  unintelligible  to  the  hearers,  and  to  admit  in  its  place  a 
fallible  version,  because  intelligible  ;  and  the  Romans  nov/ 
refuse  to  reject  one  fallible  version,  that  is  become  unintelli- 
gible, for  another  not  more  fallible,  which  may  be  understood 
by  every  body  ;  can  there  be  a  stronger  demonstration  of  the 
total  difference  of  sentiments,  in  regard  to  religious  worship 
in  the  present  Romans,  from  the  sentiments  of  their  ancestors 
in  those  early  ages  ?  Can  there,  consequently,  be  a  stronger 
demonstration  of  the  truth  of  the  paradox  I  mentioned,  namely, 
that  this  mark  of  Roman  constancy,  in  what  regards  the  dead 
letter,  is  the  strongest  evidence  of  their  mutability,  nay,  actual 
change,  in  what  concerns  the  vitals  of  religion  ?  Their  ances- 
tors considered  religion  as  a  rational  service,  the  present 
Romans  regard  it  merely  as  a  mechanical  operation.  The 
former  thought  that  the  understanding  had  a  principal  con- 
cern in  all  religious  offices  :  the  latter  seek  only  to  attach  the 
senses.  With  them,  accordingly,  the  exercises  of  publick  wor- 
ship are  degenerated  into  a  motley  kind  of  pantomime,  wherein 
much  passes  in  dumb  show,  part  is  muttered  so  as  not  to  be 
audible,  part  is  spoken  or  chanted  in  a  strange  tongue,  so  as 
not  to  be  intelligible  ;  and  the  whole  is  made  strongly  to  re* 
semble  the  performance  of  magical  spells  and  incantations,  to 
which  idea,  their  doctrine  of  the  opus  operatum  is  wonderfully 
harmonized.  But  the  smallest  affinity  to  the  devotions  of  a 
reasonable  being  to  his  All-wise  and  Almighty  Creator,  it  is 
impossible  to  discover  in  any  part  of  it.  Well  may  we  address 
them,  therefore,  in  the  words  of  Paul  to  the  Galatians,  "  Oh  ! 
'*  infatuated  people,  who  hath  bewitched  you  ;  having  begun 
*'  in  the  spirit,  are  ye  made  perfect  by  the  flesh." 

If  any  thing  could  be  more  absurd  than  worship  in  an  un- 
known tongue,  it  would  be  the  insult  offered  to  the  people's 
understanding,  in  pretending  to  instruct  them  by  reading  the 
scriptures  to  them  in  such  a  toiogue.  The  people  are  thus 
mocked  with  the  name  of  instruction  without  the  thing.  The)"^ 
are  tantalized  by  their  pastors,  who  give  and  withhold  at  the 
same  time.  They  appear  to  impart  by  pronouncing  aloud 
what  they  effectually  conceal  by  the  language.  Like  the  an- 
cient doctors  of  the  Jewish  law,  they  have  taken  away  the 
key  of  knowledge:  they  entered  not  in  themselves,  and  those 
that  were  entering  they  hindered.     Ah  blind  guides  !     Unna- 


334  LECTURES  ON 

tural  fathers  !  for  you  affect  to  be  styled  fathers,  how  do  you 
supply  your  children  with  the  food  of  their  souls?  When  they 
ask  bread  of  you,  you  give  them  a  stone.  They  implore  of 
you  spiritual  nourishment  from  the  divine  oracles,  that  they 
may  advance  in  the  knowledge  of  God,  in  faith  and  purity  ; 
and  you  say,  or  sing  to  them,  a  jargon,  (for  the  best  things  are 
jargon  to  him  to  whom  they  are  unintelligible)  which  may 
make  them  stare,  or  nod,  but  must  totally  frustrate  their  ex- 
pectation. They  starve,  as  it  were,  in  the  midst  of  plenty; 
and  are  shown  their  food,  but  not  permitted  to  taste  it;  They 
seek  to  have  their  souls  edified,  and  you  tickle  their  ears  with 
a  song. 

If  witnesses  were  necessary  to  evince  the  contrariety  of  this 
their  present  practice  to  the  intention  of  their  forefathers,  as 
well  as  the  natural  purpose  of  reading  the  scriptures  in  the 
congregation,  I  would  ask  no  witness  but  themselves.  They 
still  retain  a  memorable  testimony  against  thexnselves,  in  the 
form  of  ordaining  readers  enjoined  in  the  pontifical,  for  with 
them  this  office  is  one  of  the  minor  orders.  In  the  charge 
given  to  the  readers  by  the  bishop  at  their  ordination,  we 
have  these  words  :  "  Studete  igitur  verba  Dei,  videlicet  lec- 
*'  tiones  sacras  distincte,  et  aperte,  ad  intelligentiam  et  sedifi- 
"  cationem  fidelium,  absque  omni  mendacio  falsitatis  proferre; 
*'  ne  Veritas  divinarum  lectionum,  incuria  vestra,  ad  instruc- 
"  tionem  audientium  corrumpatur.  Quod  autem  ore  legitis, 
*'  corde  credatis,  atque  opere  compleatis  j  quatenus  auditores 
*'  vestros,  verba  pariter  et  exemplo  vestro,  docere  possitis, 
*'  IdeoqUe,  dum  legitis,  in  alto  loco  ecclesiae  stetis,  ut  ab  om- 
*'  nibus  audiamini  et  videamini."  Instructions  entirely  appo- 
site when  they  were  first  devised,  for  then  Latin  was  their 
mother  tongue  ;  but  which  now  can  serve  only  as  a  standing 
reproach  upon  their  practice,  bv  setting  its  absurdity  in  the 
most  glaring  point  of  view.  For  what  can  it  avail  for  the 
edification  of  the  people,  that  the  reader  pronounces  distinctly 
and  openly,  and  stands  in  a  conspicuous  place,  when  he  pro- 
nounces nothing  but  unmeaning  words?  Is  this  teaching  them 
by  word,  verbo  ^  Can  ihis  be  called  addressing  the  understand- 
ings of  the  faithful  ?  Out  of  thy  own  mouth  will  I  judge  thee, 
thou  pageant  of  a  teacher. 

What  shall  we  say  of  the  power  of  prepossessions,  when  an 
abuse,  so  palpable,  is  palliated  by  such  a  writer  as  father  Si- 
mon ?  I  can  bear  to  hear  the  most  absurd  things  advanced  by 
weak  and  illiberal  minds.  I  can  make  great  allowance  for  the 
power  of  education  over  such,  and  am  led  more  to  pity  than 
to  condemn.  But  it  must  awake  real  indignation,  to  see  parts 
and  literature  prostituted  to  the  vile  purpose  of  defending 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  m$ 

what  the  smallest  portion  of  common  sense  shows  at  once  to 
be  indefensible,  and  giving  a  favourable  gloss  to  the  most  flag- 
rant abuses  and  corruptions.  Simon  acknowledges,  (Hist.* 
Crir.  des  Versions  du  N.  T.  chap.  1,)  that  when  Christianity 
was  first  planted,  it  was  found  necessary,  for  the  instruction  of 
the  people,  to  translate  the  scriptures,  especially  the  New  Tes- 
tament, into  the  language  of  each  country  that  received  this 
doctrine  ;  and  adds,  that  this  remark  must  be  understood  as 
extending  lo  the  service  performed  in  the  churches,  which,  ia 
those  early  days,  was  every  where  in  the  language  of  the  peo- 
ple. The  same  thing,  he  affirms,  cardinal  Bona*  had  observed 
in  his  work  upon  liturgies.  Now  if  the  case  was  so,  it  will  not 
be  easy  to  account,  without  recurring  to  papal  usurpations,  for 
the  uniformity  in  using  Latin  in  all  the  publick  offices  of  reli- 
gion, that  had  been  introduced,  and  actually  obtained,  through 
all  the  occidental  churches,  for  ages  before  the  reformation. 
Will  Simon  say,  that  Latin  v/as  the  language  of  Britain  for 
example,  when  Christianity  was  first  planted  among  the  Bri- 
tons ;  or,  indeed,  of  any  of  the  northern  countries  of  Europe  ? 
So  far  from  it,  that,  for  the  service  of  those  countries,  there 
were,  by  his  own  confession,  translations  made  into  Gothick, 
Anglo-Saxons,  Frankish,  Sclavonick,  &c.  Yet  these  versions 
(whatever  they  were  formerly)  are  no  where  used  at  present, 
nor  have  they  been  used  for  many  centuries,  though  fragments 
of  some  of  them  are  still  to  be  found  in  the  libraries  of  the 
curious, 

^'  Nothing,"  says  Mr.  Simon,  "  is  more  extravagant,  than 
"  what  Pierre  du  Moulin  has  written  on  this  subject  against 
"  cardinal  du  Perron.  *  The  end^  says  this  minister,  *  which 
*'  the  pope  has-  proposed  to  himself,  in  establishing  the  Latin 
*■'-  tongue  in  the  publick  service,  has  been,  to  plant  atnongst  his  con^ 
*'  qxiered  nations  the  badges  of  his  empire  i*  as  if,"  subjoins 
Simon,  "  it  had  been  the  popes  by  whom  the  Latin  language 
**  had  been  extended  throughout  all  the  west."     Now  to  me 

*  Bona,  however,  does  not  say  so  much  as  seems  here  to  be  attributed  tO 
him  by  Simon.  All  that  his  words  necessarily  denote,  is,  that  the  apostles, 
and  their  successours,  in  converting  the  nations,  taught  the  people,  and  of- 
ficiated every  where,  in  the  idiom  of  the  country.  But  this  does  not  imply 
that  they  used,  for  this  purpose,  either  a  written  translation  of  the  scriptures, 
or  any  written  lirurgy.  What  he  says  afterwards,  that  in  all  the  western 
churches  they  had  no  liturgy  but  in  Latin,  evidently  implies  the  contrary. 
He  knew  well,  that  Latin  was  never  the  language  of  the  people,  in  most 
countries  of  the  western  empire.  Even  in  Africa^  where,  for  manifest  rea- 
sons, that  tongue  must  have  been  much  more  generally  spoken  than  in  the 
northern  parts  of  Europe,  he  acknowledges,  on  Augustina^s  authority,  that  it 
was  not-  understood  by  the  common  pe "ple.  ♦'  In  Africa  etiam  Latinae  lin- 
*'  gUK  usus  in  sacris  semper  viguit,  licet  earn  populus  non  intelligeret,  ut  Ay- 
**  SRstinns  testis  est."    L.  1,  C  v.  M- 


m6  LECTURES  ON 

there  appears  great  extravagance  in  this  censure  of  Simon's, 
none  in  Pierre  du  Moulin's  remark.  For  if  the  priest  of  the 
Oratory  mean,  bv  the  Latin  being  extended  throughout  the 
west,  that  it  was  become  the  language  of  the  people  in  all  the 
western  nations,  nothing  can  be  more  evidently  false.  It  was 
never  the  language  of  Scandinavia,  of  the  greater  part  of  Ger- 
many and  Gaul ;  nor  was  it  ever  the  language  of  this  island  in 
particular.  The  common  language  here,  at  least  of  the  south- 
ern part  of  the  island,  when  the  nation  was  subject  to  the 
Romans,  was  not  Latin,  but  the  ancient  British^  a  dialect  of 
the  Celtick,  which  the  people,  when  driven  out  of  the  greater 
and  better  part  of  their  own  country  by  their  conquerors  the 
Saxons,  carried  with  them  into  Wales  ;  which,  in  confirmation 
of  what  I  say,  is  still  spoken  there,  though,  doubtless,  in  so 
many  ages,  considerably  altered,  and  is  now  called  Welsh. 
The  Anglo-Saxon,  the  language  of  the  invaders,  succeeded  it, 
which,  after  the  conquest,  being  blended  with  the  Norman 
French,  hath  settled  at  last  into  the  present  English.  The 
like  changes  might  be  shown  to  have  happened  in  most  other 
European  countries.  Nor  is  this  hypothesis  of  Simon^s  more 
contrary  to  fact,  than  it  is  inconsistent  with  his  own  conces- 
sions. For  if  the  Latin  had  been  so  widely  extended  in  the 
west,  as  his  reflection  on  Pierre  du  Moulin  manifestly  implies, 
where  had  been  the  occasion  for  the  versions  into  Gothick, 
Anglo-Saxon,  Prankish,  Sciavonick,  &c.,  of  which  he  himself 
has  made  mention  ? 

Further;  Mr.  Simon's  account,  that  men,  after  their  lan- 
guage had  been  totally  vitiated  by  the  irruptions  of  barbarians, 
and  the  mixture  of  people  that  succeeded,  still  retained  the 
practice  of  reading  the  scriptures  and  liturgies  in  the  language 
which  their  forefathers  spoke,  when  Christianity  was  first  in- 
troduced among  them,  is  absolutely  incompatible  with  the 
universal  use  of  Latin  for  so  many  ages  in  the  west ;  and  is, 
consequently,  the  amplest  vindication  of  the  remark  of  du 
Moulin,  which  he  had  so  severely  and  unjustly  censured. 
For,  on  this  hypothesis,  it  would  not  be  Latin  in  any  of  the 
northern  countries  that  would  be  used  in  their  churches  ;  for 
Latin  never  was,  in  those  countries,  the  language  of  the  peo- 
ple. In  Wales  it  would  be  ancient  British,  in  England  the 
Ar  glO"Saxon,  in  Sweden  the  Gothick,  in  France  and  Germany 
the  Prankish.  Nor  can  any  thing  be  more  foreign  to  the 
cause  in  hand,  than  the  examples  brought  from  the  different 
churches  and  sects  in  Asia,  who  still  retain  the  scriptures  in 
their  ancient  na'^ive  tongues.  Had  all  these  churches  and 
sects  been,  by  any  address  or  management,  induced  to  employ 
Greek,  some  resemblance  might  have  been  fairly  pleaded }  for* 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  33? 

that  language,  to  say  the  least,  had  as  great  a  currency  in  the 
^ast  as  Latin  ever  had  in  the  west.  Nor  do  I  conceive  any 
thing  a  stronger  evidence  of  an  undue  ascendant  that  one 
church  had  obtained  over  other  churches,  than  that  she  had 
influence  enough  to  make  them  either  adopt  at  once  a  jargon 
they  did  not  understand,  or,  which  is  worse,  abandon  their  an- 
cient versions,  not  for  the  sake  of  others  more  intelligible  into 
the  modern  language  of  the  people,  but  to  make  way  for  what 
was  to  them  foreign,  as  well  as  unintelligible,  being  in  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Romans. 

I  can  make  allowance  for  the  prepossession,  though  unrea- 
sonable, that  the  present  Armenians,  Syrians,  Copts,  and 
Ethiopians,  may  retain,  for  books  held  venerable  by  their 
forefathers,  though  now  no  longer  understood.  For  the  same 
reason  I  can  make  allov^ance  for  the  attachment  of  the  people 
of  Italy  and  its  dependencies  to  the  Latin  vulgate  and  ritual, 
as  Latin  was  once  the  language  of  their  country.  And  though 
it  arise  in  them  all  from  a  silly  prejudice,  which  manifestly 
shows,  that  the  form/ of  religion  has  supplanted  the  power;  yet 
I  can  easily,  without  recurring  to  authority  or  foreign  influence, 
especially  in  the  decline  of  all  literature  and  science,  account 
for  it  from  the  weakness  incident  to  human  nature.  But  to- 
tally different  is  the  case  of  the  northern  regions,  whose  lan- 
guage Latin  never  was,  and  who,  by  the  confession  of  Romish 
criticks,  once  had  the  scriptures  and  sacred  offices  in  their  na- 
tive tongues*  Their  admitting  this  foreign  dress  in  their  re- 
ligious service,  and  submitting  to  wear  the  livery,  and  babble 
the  dialect  of  Rome,  is  the  surest  badge  of  their  slavery,  and 
of  the  triumph  of  Roman  policy  over  the  combined  forces  of 
reason  and  religion  both.  That  the  natural  consequence  of 
this  practice  would  be  to  promote  ignorance  and  superstition 
among  the  people,  it  would  be  a  mispending  of  time  to  at- 
teir>pt  to  prove. 

But  would  there  not  be  some  hazard,  that  those  sage  politi- 
cians should  overshoot  the  mark  ?  Religion,  the  christian  reli- 
gion in  particular,  has  always  been  understood  to  require  faith 
in  its  principles  ;  and  faith  in  principles  requires  some  degree 
of  knowledge  or  apprehension  of  those  principles.  If  total  ig- 
norance should  prevail,  how  could  men  be  said  to  believe  that 
of  which  they  knew  nothing  ?  The  schoolmen  have  devised  an 
excellent  succedaneum  to  supply  the  place  of  real  belief,  which 
necessarily  implies,  that  the  thing  believed  is,  in  some  sort, 
apprehended  by  the  understanding.  This  succedaneum  they 
have  denominated  implicit  faiths  an  ingenious  method  of  recon- 
ciling things  incompatible,  to  believe  every  thing,  and  to  know 
nothing,   not  so  much  as  the  terms  of  the  propositions  which 

V  u 


3,38  LECTURES  ON 

we  believe.  When  the  sacred  lessons  of  the  gospel  were  no 
longer  addressed  to  the  understandings  of  the  people  ;  when, 
in  all  the  publick  service,  they  were  put  off  with  sound  in- 
stead of  sense,  when  their  eyes  and  ears  were  amused,  but 
their  minds  left  uninstructed  ;  it  was  necessary  that  something 
should  be  substituted  for  faith,  which  always  presupposes 
knowledge  ;  nay,  that  it  should  be  something  which  might  still 
be  called  Jaith  ;  for  this  name  had  been  of  so  great  renown,  so 
long  standing,  and  so  universal  use,  that  it  was  not  judged 
safe  entirely  to  dispossess  it.  Exactly  such  a  something  is  im- 
plicit faith.  The  name  is  retained,  whilst  nobody  is  incom- 
moded with  the  thing. 

The  terms  implicit  faith  are  used  in  two  different  senses. 
With  us  protestants,  at  least  in  this  country,  no  more  is  com- 
monly me;.nt  by  them  than  the  belief  of  a  doctrine,  into  the 
truth  of  which  we  have  made  no  inquiry,  on  the  bare  authority 
of  some   person  or  society  declaring  it  to  be  true.     But  this 
always  supposes,  that  one  knows,  or  has   some  conception  of 
the  doctrine  itself.     All  that  is  denoted  by  the  term  implicit  in 
this  acceptation  is,  that  in  lieu  of  evidence,  one  rests  on  the 
judgment  of  him  or  them  by  whom  the  tenet  is  affirmed.     No 
ignorance  is  implied  but  of  the  proofs.     But  the  implicit  faith^ 
recommended  by  the  schoolmen  is  quite  another  thing,  and  is 
constituted  thus  ;  if  you  believe  that  all  the  religious  principles, 
whatever  they  be,  which  are  believed  by  such  particular  per- 
sons, are  true  ;  those  persons  who  hold  the  principles  are  ex- 
plicit believers,  yon  are  an  implicit  believer  of  all  their  princi- 
ples.    Nor  is  your  belief  the  less  efficacious,  because  you  arc 
ignorant   of  the    principles    themselves.     Perhaps   you   have 
never  heard  them  mentioned,  or  have  never  enquired  about 
them.     For  it  does  not  hold  here  as  in  the  faith  whereof  the 
apostle  speaks,  Hotv  shall  they  believe  in  him  of  whom  they  have 
not  heard?   In  the  presence  of  those  profound  doctors   the 
shoolmen,   the  apostle  would  be  found  to  be  no  other  than  an 
arrant  novice.     The  transcendent  excellency  of /m/;/zai  ya/YA 
consists  in  this,  that  you  have  it  then  in  the  highest  perfection, 
when,   in  regard  to   its  object,  you  know  nothing,   and  have 
even  heard  nothing  at  all.     In  brief,  it  is  neither  more  nor 
less  than  being  a  believer  b)'  proxy.     Scripture  saith,  "  You 
"  are  saved  through  faith,"  and  "  without  faith  it  is  impossible 
"  to  please  God."     Now  implicit  faith  is  a  curious  device  for 
pleasing  God,   and  being  saved  by  the  faith  of  others.     It  is, 
in  fact,  imputative  faith ^  at  least  as  extraordinary  as  the  impu- 
tative justice^  which  brought  so  much  obloquy  on  some  of  the 
reformers.     It  is  as  if  I  should  call  one  an  implicit  mathemati' 
ci^Uy  who  knovt's  not  a  tittle  of  mathematicks,  not  even  the  de« 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  339 

finitions  and  axioms,  but  is  convinced  of  the  knowledge  of 
some  other  person  who  is  really,  or  whom  he  supposes  to  be 
an  adept  in  that  science. 

"  To  believe  implicitly,"  says  Bona,  "  is  to  believe  in  ge- 
■*'  neral  universally  all  that  holy  mother  church  believes  ;  so  as 
*'  to  dissent  from  her  in  nothing,  nor  disbelieve  any  of  her  ar- 
"  tides.  And  though  it  be  convenient  {lictt  opportuniim  sit) 
*'  for  all,  not  only  to  believe  all  the  articles  implicitly,  but  even 
'*  some  of  them,  since  the  coming  of  Christ,  explicitly  ;  vet  it 
*'  is  not  necessary  (jion  tatnen  est  necessarium)  for  all,  especial- 
*'  ly  the  common  people,  to  believe  them  all  explicitly.  It  is 
"  proper  rather  for  those,  who  assume  the  office  of  teaching 
*'  and  preaching,  as  they  have  the  cure  of  souls."  Further, 
to  show  the  wonderful  virtues  and  efficacy  of  such  a  faith, 
another  of  the  doctors,  Gabriel  Byel,  maintains,  that,  "  if  he 
"  who  implicitly  believes  the  church,  should  think,  misled  by 
**•  natural  reason,  that  the  Father  is  greater  than  the  Son,  and 
*'  existed  before  him,  or  that  the  three  persons  are  things  lo- 
"  cally  distant  from  one  another,  or  the  like,  he  is  not  a  here- 
*'  tick,  nor  sins,  provided  he  do  not  defend  this  errour  perti- 
*'  naciously.  For  he  believes  what  he  does  believe,  because 
*'  he  thinks  that  the  church  believes  so,  subjecting  his  opinion 
**  to  the  faith  of  the  church.  For  though  his  opinion  be  er- 
*'  roneous,  his  opinion  is  not  his  faith,  nay,  his  faith,  in  con- 
"  tradiction  to  his  opinions,  is  the  faith  of  the  church.  What 
*'  is  still  more,  this  implicit  faith  not  only  defends  from  heresy 
*'  and  sin,  but  even  constitutes  merit  in  heterodoxy  itself,  and 
**  preserves  in  that  merit  one  who  forms  a  most  heterodox 
"  opinion,  because  he  thinks  the  church  believes  so."  Thus 
far  Byel.  It  is  then  of  no  consequence  what  a  man's  explicit 
faith  be  ;  he  may  be  an  Arian,  a  Socinian,  an  Anthropovnor- 
phite,  a  Polytheist,  in  short,  any  thing,  he  cannot  err,  whilst 
he  has  an  implicit  faith  in  the  church.  This  they  give  as  their 
explanation  of  that  article  of  the  creed,  "  I  believe  in  the  ho- 
"  ly  catholick  church  ;"  though,  agreeably  to  this  interpreta- 
tion, there  should  have  been  no  other  article  in  the  creed. 
This  point  alone  supersedes  every  other,  and  is  the  quintes- 
sence of  all.  Implicit  faith  has  been  sometimes  ludicrouslv 
styled  fides  carbonaria^  from  the  noted  story  of  one  who,  ex-^ 
amining  an  ignorant  collier  on  his  religious  principles,  asked 
him  what  it  was  that  he  believed.  He  answered,  "  I  believe 
"  what  the  church  believes."  The  other  rejoined,  ''  What 
"  then  does  the  church  believe  J"  He  replied  readily,  *••  The 
"  church  believes  what  I  believe."  The  other  desirousi,  if 
possible,  to  bring  him  to  particulars,  once  more  resumes  his 
"  inquiry;  '^  Tell  me  then,  I  pray  you,  what  it  is  which  you 


340  LECTURES  ON 

"  and  the  church  both  believe."  The  only  answer  the  collier 
could  give  Vv^^ as,  "  Why  truly,  Sir,  the  church  and  1  both — 
*•'  believe  the  same  thing."  This  is  implicit  faith  in  perfec- 
tion, and  in  the  estimation  of  some  celebrated  doctors,  the 
sum  of  necessary  and  saving  knowledge  in  a  christian. 

It  is  curious  to  consider  the  inferences,  which  they  them- 
selves deduce  from  this  wonderful  doctrine.  A  person,  on 
first  hearing  them,  would  take  thtm  for  the  absurd  conse- 
quences objected  by  an  adversary,  with  a  view  to  expose  the 
notion  of  implicit  faith  as  absolutely  nonsensical.  But  it  is 
quite  otherwise,  they  are  deductions  made  by  friends,  who 
are  very  serious  in  supporting  them.  One  of  these  is,  that  a 
man  may  believe  two  propositions  perfectly  contradictory  at 
the  same  time,  one  explicitly,  the  other  implicitly.  Another 
is,  that  in  such  a  case,  the  implicit  (which,  to  a  common  un- 
derstanding, appears  to  include  no  belief  at  all)  not  the  expli- 
cit, is  to  be  accounted  his  religious  faiih.  "  It  may  be,"  says 
Gabriel,  ''  that  one  may  believe  implicitly  a  certain  truth,  and 
*'  explicitly  believe  the  contrary."  Put  the  case  that  a  man 
believes,  that  whatever  the  church  believes  is  true  ;  at  the 
same  time  disbelieving  this  proposition,  Abraham  had  more 
wives  than  one^  and  believing  the  contrary,  as  thinking  it  the 
belief  of  the  church  ;  such  a  man  implicitly  believes  this  pro- 
position, Abraham  had  two  xvivesy  because  the  church  believes 
so,  and  explicitly  he  disbelieves  it.  Now  the  great  virtue  of 
implicit  faith  in  the  church  lies  here,  that  it  saves  a  man  from 
all  possible  danger,  in  consequence  of  any  explicit  erroneous 
opinions,  and  renders  it,  indeed,  unnecessary  in  him  to  be  so- 
licitous to  know  whether  his  opinions  be  right  or  wrong,  or- 
thodox or  heterodox.  No  wonder,  then,  that  the  utility  of 
this  simple  principle  is  so  highly  celebrated  by  the  schoohnen. 
"  Ha;c  fides  implicita,  qua  fidelis  credit  quicquid  ecclesia  cre- 
'^  dit,  utilissima  est  ficleli.  Na  n  si  fuerit  in  corde,  dei'endit 
"  ab  omni  hseretica  pravitate,  ut  dicit  Occam  in  tractata  de  sa- 
*'  cramentis,  et  post  eum  Gerson.  Non  enim  aliquatenus 
*''  hsercticari  valet,  qui  corde  credit  quicquid  ecclesia  catholica 
'''•  credit,  id  est,  qui  credit  iilam  veritatem,  quicquid  ecclesia 
'*  credit  est  verurn,''^  And,  indeed,  its  efficacy  must  be  the 
same,  as  the  reason  is  the  same,  in  protecting  from  the  conse- 
quences of  every  errour,  even  in  the  most  fundamental  points, 
as  in  protecting  from  what  might  ensue  on  that  trifling  errour, 
that  Abraham  had  but  one  wife. 

We  must  at  least  confess  not  only  the  consistency,  but  even 
the  humanity  of  the  Romish  system,  in  this  amazing  method 
of  simplifying  all  the  necessary  knowledge  and  faith  of  a 
christian.     For  surely,  when  the  means  of  knowledge  were, 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  341 

in  effect,  put  out  of  the  reach  of  the  people  ;  when  in  publick 
they  were  tantalized  with  the  mere  parade  of  teaching,  by  hav- 
ing instructions  chanted  to  them  in  an  unknown  tongue  ;  when 
ic  was  not  the  understanding,  but  the  senses  solely,  which 
were  employed  in  religious  offices  ;  when  every  thing  rational 
and  ediiying  was  excluded  from  the  service  ;  it  would  have 
been  unconscionable,  worse  than  even  the  tyranny  of  Egyptian 
taskmasters,  to  require  of  the  people  any  thing  like  real  faith, 
which  always  pre-supposes  some  information  given,  and  some 
knowledge  acquired,  of  the  subject.  A  merely  nominal  faith 
(and  such  entirely  is  this  scholastick  fiction  of  implicit  faith) 
suited  much  better  a  merely  mechanical  service.  In  this  man- 
ner the  knowledge  of  God,  which  is  declared  in  scripture  to 
be  more  valuable  than  burnt  offerings,  and  faith  in  him,  and 
in  the  doctrine  of  revelation,  are  superseded  to  make  room 
for  an  unbounded  submission  to,  and  confidence  in  men,  to 
wit,  those  ghostly  instructors,  whom  the  populace  must  inva- 
riably regard  as  the  mouth  of  the  uaerring  church. 

I  would  not,  however,  be  understood  as  signifying  by  what 
has  been  now  advanced  on  the  subject  of  implicit  faith,  that 
in  this  point  all  Romanists  are  perfectly  agreed.  What  I  have 
adduced  is  supported  by  great  names  among  their  doctors,  and. 
mostly  quoted  in  their  words.  Nor  was  the  doctrine,  though 
every  where  publickly  taught  in  their  schools  and  in  their  writ- 
ings, ever  censured  by  either  pope  or  council,  ecumenical  or 
provincial.  But  though  all  the  Romish  doctors  pay  great  de- 
ference, they  do  not  all,  I  acknowledge,  pay  equal  deference 
to  implicit  faith.  Some  seem  to  think  it  sufficient  for  every 
thing  ;  others  are  curious  in  distinguishing  what  those  articles 
are,  whereof  an  explicit  faith  is  requisite,  and  what  those  are, 
on  the  other  hand,  whereof  an  implicit  faith  will  answer. 
But  it  is  not  necessary  here  to  enter  into  their  scholastick 
cavils. 

So  much  shall  suffice  for  the  first  expedient  employed  b;^ 
superstition  for  the  suppression  of  her  deadly  foe  knowledge^ 
which  is,  by  perverting  the  rational  service  of  religion  into  a 
mere  amusement  of  the  senses. 


>42  LECTURES  ON 


LECTURE  XXIV. 


JDUT  though  by  such  means  as  those  now  illustrated,  reli>^ 
gious  knowledge  might  long  be  kept  low,  it  was  not  so  easy  a 
matter  to  suppress  it  altogether.  Such  a  variety  of  circum- 
stances have  an  influence  on  its  progress,  that  when  the  things 
which  have  been  long  in  confusion  begin  to  settle,  it  is  impos- 
sible to  guard  every  avenue  against  its  entrance.  One  particu- 
lar art,  and  one  particular  branch  of  science,  has  a  nearer  con- 
nexion with  other  arts  and  other  branches  of  science  than  is 
commonly  imagined.  If  you  would  exclude  one  species  of 
knowledge  totally,  it  is  not  safe  to  admit  any.  This,  how- 
ever, is  a  point  of  political  wisdom,  which,  luckily,  has  not 
been  sufficiently  understood  even  by  politicians.  When  the 
western  part  of  the  Roman  empire  was  overrun,  and  rather 
desolated  than  conquered  by  barbai'ians  ;  matters,  after  many 
long  and  terrible  conflicts,  came  by  degrees  to  settle  ;  and  se- 
veral new  states  and  new  kingdoms  arose  out  of  the  stupen- 
dous ruin.  As  these  came  to  assume  a  regular  form,  the  arts 
of  peace  revived  and  were  cultivated,  knowledge  of  course 
revived  with  them.  Of  all  kinds  of  knowledge,  I  own  that 
religious  knowledge  was  the  latest.  And  that  it  should  be  so, 
we  cannot  be  surprised,  when  we  consider  the  many  terrible 
clogs  by  which  it  was  borne  down.  But  notwithstanding  these, 
the  progress  of  letters  could  not  fail  to  have  an  influence  even 
here.  History,  languages,  criticism,  all  tended  to  open  the 
eyes  of  mankind,  and  disclose  the  origin  of  many  corruptions 
and  abuses  in  respect  of  sacred  as  well  as  profane  literature. 
How  much  this  was  acclerated  by  the  invention  of  printing, 
which  renders  the  communication  of  knowledge  so  easy,  bring- 
ing it  within  the  reach  of  those  to  whom  it  was  inaccessible 
before,  it  would  be  superfluous  to  attempt  to  prove.  Suffice 
it  to  remark,  that  towards  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  and  begin* 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  3M' 

ning  oF  the  sixteenth  century,  the  visible  face  of  things  in 
Europe  was,  in  respect  of  cultivation,  and  the  liberal  as  well 
as  useful  arts,  very  much  altered. 

The  change  had  been  insensibly  advancing  for  some  centu- 
ries before.  As  this  was  an  indication  of  a  second  dawn  of 
reason,  and  the  return  of  thought,  after  a  long  night  of  barba- 
rity and  ignorance,  it  proved  the  means  of  preparing  the 
minds  of  men  for  a  corresponding  change  in  greater  matters. 
Indeed,  there  began  to  be  disseminated  such  a  dissatisfaction 
with  the  corruptions  that  had  invaded  all  the  provinces  of  reli- 
gion, that  murmurs  and  complaints  were  almost  universal. 
In  every  part  of  Christendom,  the  absolute  necessity  of  a 
reformation  in  the  church  was  become  a  common  topic.  It  is 
true,  the  clamour  regarded  chiefly  discipline  and  manners,  but 
by  no  means  solely.  It  had,  indeed,  long  before  that  time, 
been  rendered  very  unsafe  to  glance  at  received  doctrines, 
though  in  the  most  cursory,  or  even  guarded  manner.  Yet  it 
was  impossible,  that  the  abuses  in  practice  should  not  lead  to 
ihose  errours  in  principle,  which  had  proved  the  parents  of 
those  abuses.  The  increase  of  knowledge  brought  an  increase 
of  curiosity.  The  little  that  men  had  discovered,  raised  an 
insatiable  appetite  for  discovering  more.  The  increase  of 
knowledge,  b)^  undeceiving  men  in  regard  to  some  inveterate 
prejudices,  occasioned,  not  less  infallibly,  the  decrease  of  cre- 
dulity ;  and  the  decrease  of  credulity  sapped  the  very  founda- 
tions of  sacerdotal  power.  Now  as  the  principal  means  of 
conveying  knowledge  was  by  books,  the  spiritual  powers  were' 
quickly  led  to  devise  proper  methods  for  stopping  the  progress 
of  those  books,  v/hich  might  prove  of  dangerous  consequence 
to  their  pretensions. 

This  was  the  second  expedient  above-mentioned,  adopted 
by  superstition,  or  rather  by  spiritual  tyranny,  of  whose  throne 
superstition  is  the  chief  support,  for  checking  the  progress  of 
knowledge.  The  origin  and  growth  of  this  expedient,  till  it 
arrived  at  full  maturity,  I  shall  relate  to  you  nearly  in  the 
terms  of  a  celebrated  writer,  to  whom  I  have  oftener  than 
once  had  recourse  before.  In  the  earliest  ages  of  the  church, 
though  there  was  no  ecclesiastical  prohibition  in  regard  to 
books,  pious  persons,  from  a  principle  of  conscience,  always 
thought  it  right  to  avoid  reading  bad  books,  that  they  might 
not  transgress  the  sense  of  the  divine  law,  which  prohibits  us 
from  spending  the  time  unprofitably,  and  which  commands  us 
to  abstain  from  all  appearance  of  evil,  to  avoid  everything  by 
which  we  may  be  led,  without  necessity,  to  expose  ourselves 
to  temptation,  and  be  drawn  into  sin.  These  are  obligations 
arising  froni  the  principles  of  the  law  of  nature,  and  therefore 


^4  LECTURES  ON 

perpetually  in  force.  We  are  all,  doubtless,  obliged,  though 
there  were  no  ecclesiastical  law  to  that  purpose,  to  beware  of 
mispending  the  precious  hours  in  the  perusal  of  worthless 
writings.  But,  in  process  of  time,  when  these  considerations 
were  less  minded  than  at  the  beginning,  Dionysius,  bishop  of 
Alexandria,  a  celebrated  doctor,  about  the  year  240,  being 
reproved  by  his  own  presbyters,  for  reading  books  which  they 
accounted  dangerous,  found  it  convenient  to  plead  in  his  ex- 
cuse, that  his  doubts  on  this  head  had  been  removed  bv  a 
vision,  wherewith  he  had  been  favoured  from  heaven,  which 
permitted  him  to  read  any  book,  because  he  had  discernment 
sufficient  to  enable  him  to  do  it  with  safety.  It  was,  hov/ever, 
the  general  opinion  in  those  days,  that  there  was  greater  dan- 
ger in  the  books  of  pagans,  than  in  those  of  hereticks,  which 
were  much  more  abhorred. 

The  reading  of  the  former,  the  Greek  and  the  Latin  books 
which  we  now  call  classicks,  was  more  severely  censured,  not 
as  being  intrinsically  worse  than  the  other,  but  because  those 
books  were  more  engaging,  and  the  reading  of  them  was  more 
frequently  practised  by  many  christian  doctors,  through  a  de- 
sire of  learning  eloquence,  and  the  rules  of  composition. 
And,  for  indulging  himself  in  this  practice,  Jerom  was  said 
to  have  been  either  in  vision,  or  in  dream,  buffeted  by  the 
devil.  Much  about  that  time,  to  wit,  in  the  year  400,  a  council 
in  Carthage  prohibited  the  bishops  from  reading  the  books  of 
gentiles,  but  permitted  them  to  read  those  of  hereticks.  This 
is  the  first  prohibition  in  form  of  a  canon.  Nor  is  there  any 
thing  else,  on  this  subject,  to  be  found  in  the  fathers,  except 
in  the  way  of  advice,  on  the  general  principles  of  the  divine 
law,  as  represented  above. 

The  books  of  the  hereticks,  whose  doctrine  had  been  con- 
demned by  councils,  were  indeed  often,  for  political  reasons, 
prohibited  by  the  emperours.  Thus  Constantine  prohibited 
the  books  of  Arius.  Arcadius  those  of  the  Eunomians  and 
Manichees.  Theodosius  those  of  Nestorius,  and  Martian 
the  writings  of  the  Eutychians.  In  Spain,  king  Ricaredo 
prohibited  those  of  the  Arians.  Councils  and  bishops  thought 
it  sufficient  to  declare  what  books  contained  doctrine  condemn- 
ed or  apocryphal.  They  proceeded  no  further,  leaving  it  to 
the  conscience  of  every  one  either  to  avoid  them  entirely,  or 
to  read  them  with  a  good  intention.  After  the  year  800,  the 
Roman  pontiffs,  who  had  usurped  the  greater  part  of  ecclesi- 
astical government,  expressly  forbade  men  to  read,  nay,  gave 
orders  to  burn  the  books  whose  authors  they  had  condemned 
as  guilty  of  heresy.  Nevertheless,  till  the  age  of  the  reforma- 
tion, the  number  of  books  actually  prohibited  was  but  small. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  345 

Of^  The  general  papal  prohibition,  on  pain  of  excommunication^ 
fend  v/ithout  any  other  sentence,  to  all  those  who  read  books 
containing  the  doctrine  of  hereticks,  or  of  persons  suspected 
of  heresy,  was  grown  into  disuse.  Martin  the  fifth,  in  his 
bull,  excommunicated  all  heretical  sects,  especially  Wickliffites 
and  Hussites  ;  but  made  no  mention  of  those  who  read  their 
books,  though  many  of  them  were  then  every  where  circulated* 
Leo  the  tenth,  when  he  condemned  Luther,  prohibited,  at  the 
same  time,  > on  pain  of  excommunication,  the  keeping  and  the 
reading  of  his  books.  The  succeeding  pontiffs,  in  the  bull 
called  in  ccena^  having  condemned  and  excommunicated  all 
hereticks,  did,  together  with  them,  excommunicate  also  those 
who  read  their  books.  This  produced  greater  confusion,  be- 
cause the  hereticks  not  being  condemned  by  name,  the  books 
would  be  discovered  rather  by  the  quality  of  the  doctrine  con- 
tained in  them,  than  by  the  names  of  their  authors.  Now  the 
qudity  of  the  doctrine  contained  could  not  be  known  till  the 
book  was  read,  and  consequently,  till  the  excommunication 
was  incurred,  if  the  doctrine  was  heretical.  Besides,  the 
doctrine  might  appear  very  different  to  different  readers. 
Hence  arose  innumerable  scruples  in  the  minds  of  those  weak 
but  conscientious  persons,  who  paid  an  implicit  deference  to 
the  authority  of  the  church.  The  inquisitors,  who  were  more 
diligent  than  others,  made  catalogues  of  such  as  came  to 
their  knowledge,  which,  however,  as  the  copies  taken  of  those 
catalogues  were  not  collated,  did  not  entirely  remove  the  diffi- 
culty. King  Philip  of  Spain  was  the  first  who  gave  them  a 
more  convenient  form,  having  enacted  a  law  in  1558,  that  the 
catalogue  of  books,  prohibited  by  the  Spanish  inquisition, 
should  be  printed.  After  this  example,  Paul  the  fourth  ordered 
the  inquisition  in  Rome  to  prepare,  and  cause  to  be  printed, 
an  index  of  books  proper  to  be  forbidden,  which  was  executed 
in  the  following  year  1559.  In  this  they  proceeded  much  fur- 
ther than  had  ever  been  done  before,  and  laid  the  foundations 
of  a  very  curious  system  of  policy  for  maintaining  and  exalt- 
ing, to  the  utmost,  the  authority  of  the  court  of  Rome,  by 
depriving  men  of  the  knowledge  necessary  for  defending 
themselves  against  her  usurpations. 

Hitherto  the  prohibition  had  been  confined  to  the  books  of 
hereticks,  nor  had  any  book  been  prohibited  whose  author 
had  not  been  condemned.  They  now  judged  it  expedient  to 
go  more  boldly  to  work.  Accordingly,  the  new  index,  which^ 
from  its  known  purpose  came  to  be  called  index  expurgatorius^ 
was  divided  into  three  parts.  The  first  contained  the  names 
of  those  authors,  v/hose  whole  works,  whether  the  subject 
were  sacred  or  profane,  were  forbidden  j  and  in  this  number 

X  X 


346  LECTURES  ON 

are  included  not  only  those  who  have  professed  a  doctrine 
contrary  to  that  of  Rome,  but  even  many  who  continued  all 
their  life,   and  died  in  her  communion.     In  the  second  part 
were  contained  the  names  of  particular  bo(?lcs  which  are  con- 
demned, though  other  books  of  the  same  authors  be  not.     In 
the  th<rd,  beside  some  anonymous  writings  specified,  there  is 
one    general    rule,   whereby   all  those   books   are   forbidden, 
which  do  not  bear  the  author's  name,  published  since  the  year 
1519.     Nay,  many  authors  and  books  are  condemned,  which 
for  three  hundred,  two  hundred,  or  one  hundred  years,  had 
passed  through  the  hands  of  all  the  men  of  letters  in  the 
church,  and  of  which  the   Roman  pontiffs  had  been  in  the 
knowledge  for  so  long  a  time  without  finding  fault.     Nay, 
what  is  still  more  extraordinary,  some  modern  books  were 
included  in  the  prohibition,  which  had  been  printed  in  Italy, 
even  in  Rome,   with  the  approbation  of  the  inquisitors,  nay, 
of  the  pope  himself,  signified  by  his  brief  accompanying  rhe 
publication.     Of  this  kind  are  the  annotations  of  Erasmus  on 
the  New  Testament,   to  which  Leo  the  tenth,  after  having 
read  them,   gave  his  approbation  in  a  brief,  dated  at  Rome 
1518.     Above  all,  it  is  worthy  of  notice,  that  under  colour  of 
faith  and  religion,  those  books  are  prohibited,   and  their  au- 
thors condemned,  wherein  the  authority  of  princes  and  civil 
magistrates  is  defended   against   ecclesiastical  usurpations  ; 
those  wherein  the  authority  of  bishops  and  councils  is  de- 
fended against  the  usurpations  of  the  court  of  Rome  ;  and 
those  wherein  are  disclosed  the  tyranny  and  hypocrisy  with 
which,  under  pretence  of  religion,  the  people  is  abused  either 
by  deceit,  or  by  violence.     In  brief,   a  better  expedient  was 
never  devised,  (had  it  been  a  little   more  capable  of  being 
carried  into  effect)  for  employing  religion,  so  as  to   divest 
men  not  only  of  all  knowledge,  but  of  every  vestige  of  ration- 
ality. So  far  did  the  Roman  inquisition,  at  that  time,  proceed, 
that  they  made  a  list  of  sixty-two  printers,  prohibiting  all  the 
books  printed  by  them,  of  whatever  author,   subject,  or  lan- 
guage, with  an  addiiioaal  clause  still  more  comprehensive,  to 
wit,   and  all  the  books  printed  by  other  such  like  printers, 
who  have  printed  the  books  of  hereticks.     In  consequence  of 
which,  there  hardly  remained  any  books  to  read.     Nay,  to 
show  the  incredible  excess  of  their  rigour,  thr  prohibition  of 
every  book,  cootained  in  the  catalogue  was  on  pain  of  excom- 
munication to  the  reader  ipso  fncto^  reserving  to  the  pope  the 
power  of  inflicrir.g  the  deprivation  of  offices,   and  benefices, 
incapacitation,  perpetual  infamy,   and  other  arbitrary  pains. 
Thus  was  the  court  of  Rome,   in  defence,  as  was  falsely  pre- 
tended, of  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  but  in  reality  of  her  own 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  34f 

despotism,  as  the  Turks  and  Saracens,  in  defence  of  the 
superstition  of  the  impostor  Mahoroet,  engaged  in  a  war 
against  literature  and  knowledge,  tending  evidently  to  the  ex- 
termination of  arts  and  sciences,  and  to  the  transformation  of 
men,  in  every  thing  but  external  form,  into  brutes.  And  with 
equal  reason  was  this  the  aim  of  both  mahometism  and' 
popery.  False  religion,  of  every  kind,  must  be  a  mortal 
enemy  to  knowledge  :  for  nothing  is  more  certain,  than  that 
knowledge  is  a  mortal  enemy  to  all  false  religion. 

How  similar  have  been  the  aims  and  the  pretensions  of 
pagan  and  of  papal  Rome  !  Both  aspired,  and  with  amazing 
success,  at  universal  empire.  But  how  dissimilar  have  been 
the  means  employed  for  the  attainment  of  the  end.  The 
former  pagan  Rome,  secured  the  superiority  which  her  arms 
had  gamed,  by  diffusing  knowledge,  and  civilizing  the  con- 
quered nations :  thus  making,  as  it  were,  compensation  to 
them  by  her  arts  for  the  injustice  she  had  done  them  by  her 
arms.  The  latter,  papal  Rome,  who,  for  a  long  time  indeed, 
employed  more  fraud  than  violence,  (though  far  from  reject- 
ing the  aid  of  either)  secured  her  conquests  by  lulling  the 
people  in  ignorance,  diverting  their  curiosity  with  monstrous 
legends,  and  monkish  tales  and  by  doing  what  she  could  to 
render  and  keep  them  barbarians. 

In  regard  to  the  expedient,  of  which  I  have  here  been 
treating,  the  prohibition  of  books  by  an  index  expurgatorius, 
there  seem  to  have  been  two  capital  errours  in  Rome's  method 
of  managing  this  affair,  notwithstanding  her  political  wisdom. 
But  nothing  human  is  on  all  sides  perfect.  One  was,  that  she 
was  some  centuries  too  late  in  adopting  this  measure.  It 
would  be  difficult  to  say  what  might  have  been  effected,  had 
the  attempt  been  earlier  made,  and  supported  with  her  usual 
firmness.  The  other  errour  was,  that  things  had  proceeded 
too  far  for  so  violent  a  remedy.  Had  less  been  attempted, 
more  would  have  been  attained.  The  inquisitors,  in  the  true 
spirit  of  their  calling,  and  in  compliance  with  the  impetuous 
temper  of  the  reigning  pontiff,  breathed  nothing  but  extirpa- 
tion and  perdition.  They  had  not  so  much  knowledge  of 
legislation  as  to  perceive,  that  when  a  certain  point  is  exceeded 
in  the  severity  of  laws,  they  are  actually  enfeebled  by  what 
was  intended  to  invigorate  them.  Hardly  was  there  a  man 
that  could  read,  who  was  not  involved  in  the  excommuiiica-. 
tion  denounced  by  an  act  so  extravagant.  Nor  could  any 
thing  render  the  sentence  more  contemptible,  or  prove  a 
greater  bar  to  its  execution,  than  its  being  made  thus  to  com^ 
prehend  almost  every  body. 


34a  LECTURES  ON 

This  errour  was  quickly  perceived.  Recourse  was  had, 
not  without  effect,  to  Paul's  successour,  Pius  the  fourth,  who, 
being  a  man  of  more  temper  than  his  predecessor,  remitted 
to  the  council  of  Trent,  then  sitting,  the  consideration  of  the 
affair.  They,  accordingly,  committed  to  some  of  the  fathers 
and  doctors  the  examination  of  suspected  books,  and  the  re- 
visal  and  correction  of  that  absurd  act  of  pope  Paul,  acknow- 
ledging, that  it  had  produced  scruples,  and  given  cause  for 
complaints.  Since  that  time,  the  prohibitory  laws,  though, 
in  other  respects,  far  from  being  more  moderate,  have  avoided 
the  most  exceptionable  of  those  indefinite  and  comprehensive 
clauses  complained  of  in  the  former  ;  and  I  suspect,  have  by 
consequence  proved  more  effectual,  at  least  in  Italy  and  Spain, 
in  retarding  the  progress  of  knowledge. 

Indeed,  for  some  ages  past,  no  heresy  has  appeared  so 
damnable  in  Italy  to  the  ghostly  fathers,  to  whom  the  revisal 
of  books  is  intrusted,  us  that  which  ascribes  any  kind  of  au- 
thority to  magistrates,  independent  of  the  pope  ;  no  doctrine 
so  divine,  as  that  which  exalts  the  ecclesiastical  authority 
above  the  civil,  not  only  in  spiritual  matters,  but  in  secular. 
Nay,  the  tenet  on  this  subject,  in  highest  vogue,  with  the 
canonists,  is  that  which  stands  in  direct  opposition  to  the 
apostle  Paul's.  The  ver}'  pinnacle  of  orthodoxy  with  those 
gentlemen  is,  that  the  lawful  commands  of  the  civil  magistrate 
do  not  bind  the  conscience;  that  our  only  motive  to  obedience 
here  is  prudence,  from  fear  of  the  temporal  punishment  de- 
nounced by  him  ;  and  that,  if  we  have  the  address  to  elude 
his  vigilance,  and  escape  the  punishment,  our  disobedience  is 
no  sin  in  the  sight  of  God.  It  is  impossible  for  any  thing  to 
be  more  flatly  contradictory  to  the  doctrine  of  all  antiquity, 
particularly  that  of  the  great  apostle,  who  commands  us  to  be 
subject  to  those  powers,  not  only  for  fear  of  their  wrath,  but 
for  conscience  sake.  It  was  lucky  for  Paul,  the  apostle  I 
mean,  not  the  pope,  that  he  had  published  his  sentiments,  on 
this  subject,  about  1500  years  before  that  terrible  expedient 
of  the  index  was  devised.  He  had,  by  this  means,  obtained 
an  authority  in  the  christian  world,  which  Rome  herself, 
though  she  may,  where  her  influence  is  greatest,  for  a  time, 
elude  it,  cannot  totally  destroy.  Otherwise  that  missionary 
of  Christ  must  have  long  ago  had  a  place  in  the  Index  expur- 
gatorius. 

But  to  return  ;  Rome  has  obstructed  the  progress  of  know- 
ledge, not  only  by  suppressing  altogether  books  not  calculated 
to  favour  her  views,  but  by  reprinting  works,  which  had  too 
great  a  currency  for  them  to  suppress,  mutilated  and  grossly 
adulterated.     Those  editions,  when  they  came  abroad,  being 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  34^ 

foif  the  most  part  neatly,  many  of  them  elegantly,  printed,  and 
well  executed,  were  ignorantly  copied  by  the  printers  of  other 
countries,  who  knew  not  iheir  defects.  In  this  way  those 
corruptions  have  been  propagated.  Besides,  Rome  wants  not 
her  instruments  in  most  countries,  protestant  as  v/ell  as  popish, 
such  as  priests  and  confessors,  Avho  are  always  read}  to  lend 
their  assistance  in  forwarding  her  views.  Hence  it  is  often 
rendered  extremely  difficult  to  distinguish  the  genuine  editions 
from  the  spurious.  For  let  it  be  observed,  that  their  visitor* 
of  books  do  not  think  it  enough  to  cancel  whatever  displeases 
them  in  the  authors  they  examine  :  they  even  venture  to  foist 
in  what  they  judge  proper,  in  the  room  of  what  they  have 
expunged.  In  the  year  1607",  the  index  expiirgatorius^  -pub- 
lished at  Rome,  specified  and  condemned  all  the  obnoxious 
places  in  certain  authors,  which  were  judged  worthy  to  be 
blotted  out.  This,  to  those  who  possess  that  index^  shows 
plainly  what  were  the  things  which,  in  several  authors  of  re- 
putation, were  either  altered  or  rased.  But  such  indexes, 
which,  in  the  hands  of  a  critick,  would  prove  extremely  use- 
ful for  restoring  old  books  to  their  primitive  purity  and  inte- 
grity, are  now  to  be  found  only  in  the  libraries  of  a  very  few, 
in  the  southern  parts  of  Europe.  Whether  there  be  any  of 
them  in  this  island  I  cannot  say.  But  the  consequence  of  the 
freedom,  above  related,  which  has  been  taken  by  the  court  of 
Rome  with  christian  writers  of  the  early  ages,  (for  it  luckily 
did  not  answer  their  purpose  to  meddle  with  the  works  of  pa- 
gans) has  rendered  it,  at  this  day,  almost  impossible  to  know 
the  real  sentiments  of  many  old  authors  of  great  name,  both 
ecclesiasticks  and  historians  :  there  being  of  several  of  them 
scarcely  any  edition  extant  at  present,  except  those  which  have 
been  so  miserably  garbled  by  the  court  of  Rome,  or,  which 
amounts  to  the  same  thing,  editions  copied  from  those  which 
they  had  vitiated  by  their  interpolations  and  corrections. 

But  what  would  appear  the  most  incredible  of  all,  if  the  act, 
were  not  still  in  being,  pope  Clement  the  eighth,  in  the  year 
1595,  in  his  catalogue  of  forbidden  books,  published  a  decree, 
that  all  the  books  of  catholick  authors,  written  since  the  year 
tS\5^  should  be  corrected,  not  only  by  retrenching  what  is 
not  conformable  to  the  doctrine  of  Rome,  but  also  by  adding 
what  may  be  judged  proper  by  the  correctors.  That  you  may^ 
see  I  do  not  wrong  him,  (for  that,  in  corruptions  of  this  kind, 
they  should  be  so  barefaced  is  indeed  beyond  belief)  it  is  ne- 
cessary to  subjoin  his  own  words  :  In  Ubris  cathoJicorum  re- 
centiorum^  qui  post  annum  Christianas  salutis  1515  conscripti 
sint,  si  id  quod  corrigendum  occurrit^  paucis  demptis  ant  additis 
emendari  posse  videatur,  id  correctores  faciendum  curent ;  sin 


35©  LECTURES  ON 

minus^  omnino  deleatur.  The  reason  why  the  year  1515  is  par- 
ticularly specified,  as  that  after  which  the  writings,  even  of 
Roman  catholicks,  were  to  undergo  a  more  strict  examination 
and  scrunity  than  any  published  by  su -h  before,  is  plainly  this: 
It  was  in  the  year  immediately  following,  that  Luther  began 
to  declaim  against  indulgences,  which  proved  the  first  dawn 
of  the  reformation.  His  preaching  and  publications  produced 
a  very  hot  controversy.  Now  many  of  those  who  defended 
what  was  called  the  catholick  cause,  and  strenuously  maint.iin« 
ed  the  perfect  purit}^  of  the  church's  doctrine,  did  not  hesitate 
to  acknowledge  corruptions  in  her  discipline,  and  particularly 
in  the  conduct  of  Rome,  which  needed  to  be  reformed.  They 
affected  to  distinguish  between  the  court  and  the  church  of 
Rome,  a  distinction  no  way  palatable  to  the  former.  Now  it 
would  have  been  exceedingly  imprudent  to  suppress  those  con- 
troversial pieces  altogether,  especially  at  that  time,  when  they 
were  universally  considered  as  being,  and  in  fact  were,  the 
best  defence  of  the  Romish  cause  against  the  encroachments 
of  protestantism,  and  the  reformation.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  concessions  made  in  them,  in  regard  to  discipline,  and 
the  court  of  Rome,  and  the  distinctions  they  contained,  bore 
an  aspect  very  unfavourable  to  Roman  despotism.  Hence  the 
determination  of  correcting  them,  not  only  by  expunging  what 
was  not  relished  at  court,  but  by  altering  and  inserting  what- 
ever was  judged  proper  to  alter,  or  insert,  by  the  ruling  pow- 
ers in  the  church.  Authors  had  been  often  falsified  before, 
and  made  to  say  what  they  never  meant,  nay,  the  reverse  of 
what  they  actually  said :  but  of  a  falsification  so  imprudently 
conducted,  this  of  pope  Clement  was  the  first  example.  Their 
interpolations,  however,  of  the  works  even  of  Roman  catho- 
licks, though  not  so  avowedly  made,  have  by  no  means  been 
confined  to  those  who  have  written  since  the  year  1515,  Plati* 
na,  a  writer  of  the  fifteenth,  and  therefore  of  the  former  cen- 
tury, who  gave  the  world  a  history  of  the  popes,  though  far 
from  being  unfavourable  to  the  pretensions  of  Rome,  has  not 
escaped  unhurt  their  jealous  vigilance.  For  though  he  had 
said  very  little,  as  Bower  well  observ^es,  that  could  be  sus- 
pected of  being  any  way  offensive,  that  very  little  has  been 
thought  too  much.  Accordingly,  he  has  been  taught,  in  all 
the  editions  of  his  v/ork,  since  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth 
century,  to  speak  with  more  reserve,  and  to  suppress,  or  dis- 
guise, some  truths  which  he  had  formerly  told. 

Hence  it  happens,  that  in  regard  to  all  the  books  which  have 
passed  through  the  hands  of  Roman  licensers,  or  inquisitors, 
we  can  conclude  nothing  from  what  we  find  in  them,  in  re- 
gard to  the  sentiments  of  their  authors,  but  solely  in  regard 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  351 

Ib'the  sentiments  of  Rome,  to  an  exact  conformity  to  which, 
it  was  judged  necessary,  that  by  all  possible  methods  of 
squeezing  and  wrenching,  maiming  and  interpolating,  they 
should  be  brought.  Nor  has  the  revisal  been  confined  to  books 
written  on  religious  subjects,  but  extended  to  all  subjects,  po- 
liticks, history,  works  of  science,  and  of  amusement.  Nay, 
what  is  more,  the  pope  came  at  last  to  claim  it  as  an  exclusive 
privilege,  to  prohibit,  and  to  license,  not  for  Rome  only,  and 
the  ecclesiastical  state,  but  for  all  Christendom,  at  least  for  all 
the  countries  wherein  his  authority  is  acknowledged,  insisting, 
that  what  he  prohibits,  no  prince  whatever,  even  in  his  own 
dominions,  dares  license,  and  what  he  licenses,  none  dares 
prohibit.  The  first  of  these  has  been  generally  conceded  to 
him,  though  not  perhaps  punctually  obeyed. 

The  second  occasioned  a  violent  struggle  in  the  beginning 
of  the  last  century,  between  the  pope  and  the  king  of  Spain, 
on  occasion  of  a  book  written  by  cardinal  Baronius,  containing 
many  things  in  derogation  of  that  monarch's  government  and 
title,  and  traducing,  with  much  asperity,  many  of  his  ancestors, 
the  kings  of  Arragon.  The  book  was  licensed  at  Rome,  but 
prohibited  in  the  Spanish  dominions.  The  monarch  stood 
firm  in  his  purpose,  and  the  pope  thought  fit  to  drop  the  con- 
troversy, but  not  to  renounce  the  claim.  This  Rome  never 
does,  actuated  by  a  political  maxim  formerly  suggested,  of 
which  she  has  often  availed  herself  when  a  proper  opportunity 
appeared.  A  more  particular  account  of  this  contest  you 
have  in  father  Paul's  discourse  on  the  constitution  and  rules 
of  the  inquisition  at  Venice.  How  great  would  be  the  conse- 
quence of  this  papal  privilege,  if  universally  acquiesced  in, 
any  person  of  reflection  will  easily  conceive.  Who  knows  not 
the  power  of  first  impressions  on  any  question,  the  influence 
of  education,  and  the  force  of  habit,  in  rivetting  opinions  form- 
ed in  consequence  of  being  uniformly  accustomed  to  attend  to 
one  side  only  of  the  question.  All  these  advantages  the  pontiff 
would  have  clearly  in  his  favour,  could  he  but  secure  to  him- 
self that  high  prerogative,  and  become,  in  effect,  our  supreme 
•r  only  teacher. 


352  LECTURES  OH 


LECTURE  XXV. 


XX  AVING  discussed,  in  the  two  preceding  lectures,  what  re* 
lates  to  the  concealment  of  scripture,  and  of  all  the  publick 
offices  of  religion,  by  the  use  of  an  unknown  tongue,  and  to 
the  check  given  to  the  advancement  of  knowledge  by  the  /n- 
dex  expurgatorius^  I  intend,  in  this  discourse,  to  consider  the 
third  grand  expedient  adopted  by  Rome  for  securing  the  im- 
plicit obedience  of  her  votaries,  namely  persecution. 

Nothing  is  clearer,  from  the  New  Testament,  than  that 
this  method  of  promoting  the  faith  is  totally  unwarranted,  as 
well  by  the  great  author,  as  by  the  first  propagators  of  our  re- 
ligion. His  disciples  were  sent  out  as  sheep  amidst  wolves, 
exposed  to  the  most  dreadful  persecutions,  but  incapable  oi 
ever  giving  to  their  enemies  a  return  in  kind,  in  a  consistency 
with  this  signature  of  Christ's  servants  ;  for  in  no  change  of 
circumstances  will  it  suit  the  nature  of  the  sheep  to  persecute 
the  wolf.  As  it  was  not  an  earthly  kingdom  which  our  Lord 
came  to  establish,  so  it  v/as  not  by  carnal  weapons  that  his 
spiritual  warfare  was  to  be  conducted.  The  means  must  be 
adapted  to  the  end.  My  kingdom^  said  he,  is  not  of  this  world; 
if  my  kingdom  were  of  this  world,  then  would  my  servants  fight* 
Worldly  weapons  are  suited  to  the  conquest  of  worldly  king- 
doms. But  nothing  can  be  worse  adapted  to  inform  the 
understanding,  and  conquer  the  heart,  than  such  coarse  im- 
plements. Lactantius  says  with  reason,  Defendenda  est  reli- 
gio  non  occidtndo,  sed  moriendo,  non  scevitia  sed patientia.  To 
convince,  and  to  persuade,  both  by  teaching  and  by  example, 
was  the  express  commission  given  to  the  apostles.  The  only  wea- 
pons which  they  were  to  employ,  or  which  could  be  employed, 
for  this  purpose,  were  arguments  and  motives  from  reason 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  353 

and,  scripture.  Their  only  armour,  faith  and  patience,  pru- 
dence and  innocence,  the  comforts  arising  from  the  conscious- 
ness of  doing  their  duty,  and  the  unshaken  hope  of  the  pro- 
mised reward.  By  means  of  this  panoply,  however  lightly  it 
may  be  accounted  of  by  those  who  cannot  look  beyond  the 
present  scene,  they  were,  in  the  spiritual,  that  is,  the  most  im- 
portant sense,  invulnerable  ;  and  by  means  of  their  faith,  as 
the  spring  which  set  all  their  other  virtues  in  motion,  they 
obtained  a  victory  over  the  world. 

Beside  the  declared  enemies  from  without,  pagans  and  infi- 
del Jews,  whom  christians  had,  from  the  beginning  to  contend 
with,  there  arose  very  early,  in  the  bosom  of  the  church,  as 
had  been  foretold  by  the  apostles,  certain  internal  foes,  first  to 
the  primitive  simplicity  of  christian  doctrine,  and  afterwards 
by  a  natural  progress,  to  the  unity,  sympathy,  and  love,  which, 
as  members  of  the  same  society,  having  one  common  head, 
they  were  under  the  strongest  obligations  to  observe  inviolate. 
From  the  very  commencement  of  the  church,  the  tares  of 
errour  had,  by  divine  permission,  for  the  exercise  and  proba- 
tion of  the  faithful,  been  sown  among  the  good  seed  of  the 
word.  The  only  remedies  which  had  been  prescribed  by  the 
apostles  against  those  who  made  divisions  in  the  christian 
community,  founding  new  sects,  which  commonly  distinguish- 
ed themselves  by  the  profession  of  some  erroneous  doctrine, 
.or  at  least  some  idle  and  unedifying  speculation,  were  first, 
repeatedly  to  admonish  them,  and  afterwards,  when  admoni- 
tions should  prove  ineffectual,  to  renounce  their  company,  that 
is,  to  exclude  them  from  their  brotherhood,  or  excommunicate 
them  ;  for  the  original  import  of  these  expressions  is  nearly 
the  same.  On  this  footing  matters  remained  till  Constantine, 
in  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century,  embraced  the  faith, 
and  gave  the  church  a  sort  of  political  establishment  in  the 
empire. 

From  the  apologies  of  the  fathers  before  that  period,  (so  the 
defences  of  our  religion  written  by  them  are  named)  it  is  evi- 
dent, that  they  universally  considered  persecution  for  any  opi- 
.nions,  whether  true  or  false,  as  the  height  of  injustice  and 
oppression.     Nothing  can  be  juster  than  the  sentiment  of  Ter- 
tullian,  which  was,  indeed,  as  far  as  appears,  the  sentiment  of 
all  the  fathers  of  the  first  three  centuries.     "  Non  religionis  est 
"  cogere  religionem,  quae  sponte  suscipi  debeat,  non  vi."    And 
.  to  the  same  purpose  Lactantius,  "  Quis  imponat  mihi  necessi- 
''  tatem  vel  colendi  quod  nolim,  vel  quod  yelim  non  colcndi  ? 
"  Quid  jam  nobis  ulterius  relinquilur,  si  etiam  hoc,  quod  vo- 
"  luntate    fieri  oportet,    libido    extorqueat   aliena?"    Again, 
,  *'  Non  est  opus  vi.et  injuria ;  quiareligio  cogi  non  potest,  ver- 
■        .  ,  Y  y 


^4  LECTURES  OK 

"  bis  potius  quam  verberibus  res  agenda  est,  ut  sit  voluntas.''' 
Once  more,  "  Longe  diversa  sunt  carnificina  et  pietas,  nee 
"  potest  aut  Veritas  cum  vi,  aut  jpstitia  cum  crudelitate  con- 
*' jungi."  Their  notions  in  those  days,  in  regard  to  civil  go- 
vernment, seem  also  to  have  been  much  more  correct  than  they 
became  soon  after.  For  all  christians,  in  the  ages  of  the  mar- 
tyrs, appear  to  have  agreed  in  this,  that  the  magistrate's  only 
object  ought  to  be  the  peace  and  temporal  prosperitj^  of  the 
commonwealth. 

But  (such  alas  !  is  the  depravity  of  human  nature)  when  the 
church  was  put  on  a  different  footing,  men  began,  not  all  at 
once,  but  gradually,  to  change  their  system  in  regard  to  those 
articles,  and  seemed  strongly  inclined  to  think,  that  there  was 
no  injustice  in  retaliating  upon  their  enemies,  by  employing 
those  unhallowed  weapons  in  defence  of  the  true  religion, 
which  had  been  so  cruelly  employed  in  support  of  a  false  :  not 
considering,  that  by  this  dangerous  position,  that  one  may 
justly  persecute  in  support  of  the  truth,  the  right  of  persecut- 
ing for  any  opinions  will  be  effectually  secured  to  him  who 
holds  them,  provided  he  have  the  power.  For  what  is  every 
man's  immediate  standard  of  orthodoxy  but  his  own  opinions  ? 
And  if  he  have  a  right  to  persecute  in  support  of  them,  because 
of  the  ineffable  importance  of  sound  opinions  to  our  eternal 
happiness,  it  must  be  even  his  duty  to  do  it  when  he  can.  For 
if  that  interest,  the  interest  of  the  soul  and  eternity,  come  at 
all  within  the  magistrate's  province,  it  is  unquestionably  the 
■most  important  part  of  it.  Now  as  it  is  impossible  he  can 
have  any  other  immediate  directory,  in  regard  to  what  is  or- 
thodox, but  his  own  opinions,  and  as  the  opinions  of  different 
men  are  totally  different,  it  will  be  incumbent,  by  the  strongest 
of  all  obligations,  on  one  magistrate  to  persecute  in  support  of 
a  faith,  which  it  is  equally  incumbent  on  another  by  persecution 
to  destroy.  Should  you  object,  that  the  standard  is  not  any 
thing  so  fleeting  as  opinion :  it  is  the  word  of  God,  and  right 
reason.  This,  if  you  attend  to  it,  will  bring  you  back  to  the 
very  same  point  which  you  seek  to  avoid.  The  dictates  both 
of  scripture  and  of  reason,  we  see  but  too  plainly,  are  differ- 
ently interpreted  by  different  persons,  of  whose  sincerity  we 
have  no  ground  to  doubt.  Now  to  every  individual,  that  only 
amongst  all  the  varieties  of  sentiments  can  be  his  rule,  which 
to  the  best  of  his  judgment,  that  is,  in  his  opinion,  is  the  im- 
port of  either.  Nor  is  there  a  possibility  of  avoiding  this 
recuiTence  at  last.  But  such  is  the  intoxication  of  power,  that 
men  blinded  by  it,  will  not  allow  themselves  to  look  forward 
to  those  dreadful  consequences.  And  such  is  the  presumption 
of  vain  man,  (of  which  bad  quality  the  weakest  judgments 
have  commonly  the  greatest  share)  that  it  is  with  difficulty  any 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  3S5 

one  person  can  be  brought  to  think,  that  anjj^  other  person  has, 
®r  can  have,  as  strong  conviction  of  a  different  set  of  opinions, 
as  he  has  of  his. 

But  to  return  to  our '  narrative.  When  the  secular  powers 
had  changed  sides,  and  were  now  come  to  be  on  the  side  of 
Christianity,  this  was  the  manner,  on  the  subject  of  religion^ 
in  which  some  men  among  the  clergy  began  to  argue.  Princes 
ought  to  be  considered  in  a  twofold  capacity ;  one  is,  that  of 
christians,  the  other,  that  of  princes,  in  both  which  characters 
they  are  bound  to  serve  God :  as  christians,  by  observing  the 
divine  commandments,  like  every  other  disciple  of  Christ :  as 
princes,  by  purging  the  church  of  all  schisms,  heresies,  and 
blasphemies,  punishing  all  transgressors  of  the  divine  precepts, 
but  more  especially  those  who,  by  the  transgressions  above- 
mentioned,  violate  the  first  table  of  the  decalogue  ;  for  as  those 
sins  are  committed  more  immediately  against  God,  they  are 
much  more  heinous  than  theft,  adultery,  murder,  or  any  sins 
committed  against  our  neighbour.  Now  under  the  general 
denomination  of  sins  of  the  first  table,  every  sect  (were  their 
verdicts  to  be  severally  taken)  would  comprehend  almost  all 
the  distinguishing  tenets  of  every  other  sect.  And  though,  In 
support  of  their  plea,  they  might  have  many  specious  things 
to  advance,  they  would  all  be  found  to  lean  on  a  false  hypo- 
thesis. 

First,  it  is  false,  that  the  concerns  of  the  soul  and  eternity 
fall  under  the  cognizance  and  jurisdiction  of  the  magistrate. 
To  say  that  they  do,  is  to  blend  the  very  different  and  hardly 
compatible  characters  of  magistrate  and  pastor  in  the  same 
person  ;  or,  which  is  worse,  to  graft  the  latter  upon  the  for- 
mer, the  sure  method  of  producing  a  most  absurd  and  cruel 
despotism,  such  as  obtains  in  all  Mahometan  countries :  nor 
is  that  much  better  which  prevails  more  or  less  in  popish 
countries,  especially  in  the  ecclesiastical  state,  and  in  Spain 
and  Portugal,  where  the  magistrate  is  grafted  on  the  pastor, 
or  rather  on  the  priest. 

>  Secondly,  it  is  false,  that  spiritual  concerns,  if  they  did  fall 
Cinder  the  cognizance  of  the  magistrate,  are  capable  of  being 
regulated  by  such  expedients  as  are  proper  for  restraining  the 
injuries  of  violence  and  fraud,  and  preserving  tranquillity  and 
good  order  in  society.  Though,  by  coercion,  crimes,  which 
are  outward  and  overts  acts,  may  effectually  be  restrain- 
ed, it  is  not  by  coercion  that  those  inward  effects  can  be 
produced,  conviction  in  the  understanding,  or  conversion 
in  the  heart.  Now  these  in  religion  are  all  in  alL  By 
racks  and  gibbets,  fire  and  faggot,  we  may  as  rationally 
propose  to  mend  the  sight  of  a  man  who  squints,  or  is 
purblind,  as  by  these  means  to  enlighten  the  infidel's  or  the 


S5S  LECTURES  ON 

heretick's  understanding,  confute  his  errours,  and  bring  him 
to  the  belief  of  what  he  disbelieved  before.  That  by  such  nte- 
thods  he  may  be  constrained  to  profess  what  he  disbelieves 
still,  nobody  can  deny,  or  even  doubt.  But  to  extort  a  hypo- 
critical profession,  is  so  far  from  being  to  promote  the  cause 
of  God  and  religion,  that  nothing,  by  the  acknowledgment  of 
men  of  all  parties,  can  stand  more  directly  in  opposition  lo  it. 
Nihil  est  tam  voluntarium  quam  religio,  says  Lactantius,  m  qua^ 
si  animus  sacrijicantis  aversus  est^  jam  sublata^  jam  nulla  est. 

Thirdly,  it  is  a  false,  though  a  very  common  notion,  that 
errours  concerning  the  divine  nature  and  perfections  ought 
to  be  denominated  blasphemies,  or  considered  as  civil  crimes. 
Blasphemy,  in  regard  to  God,  corresponds  to  calumny  in  regard 
to  man.  The  original  name  for  both  is  the  same.  As  the 
latter  always  implies  what,  in  the  language  of  the  law,  is 
called  mains  animus^  a  disposition  to  calumniate,  so  does  the 
former.  Mere  mistake,  in  regard  to  character,  especially 
Ivhen  the  mistake  is  not  conceived  by  hivii  who  entertains  it  to 
derogate  from  the  character,  constitutes  neither  of  those 
crimes.  That  no  imputation,  however,  is  commoner,  can  be 
afscribed  solely  to  that  malevolence,  which  bigotry  and  con- 
tention never  fail  to  produce.  Thus  the  arminian  and  the 
calvinist,  the  protestant  and  the  papist,  the  Jesuit  and  the  jan- 
senist,  throw  and  retort  on  each  other  the  unchristian  reproach 
of  blasphemy.  Yet  each  is  so  far  from  intending  to  lessen,  in 
the  opinion  of  others,  the  honour  of  the  divine  majesty,  that 
he  is  fully  convinced  that  his  own  principles  are  better  adapted 
to  raise  it  than  those  of  his  antagonist,  and  for  that  very  rea- 
son he  is  so  strenuous  in  maintaining  them.  But  to  blacken, 
as  much  as  possible,  the  designs  of  an  antagonist,  in  order  the 
more  easily  to  bring  odium  on  his  opinions,  is  the  too  com- 
mon, though  detestable,  resource  of  theological  controvertists*. 

I  proceed  to  show  the  advances  which,  from  time  to  time, 
were  made,  till  that  system  of  persecution  which,  in  a  great 
part  of  the  world,  still  obtains,  was  brought  to  maturity  and 
established.  For  ages  after  the  opinion  first  took  place  among 
christians,  that  it  was  the  magistrate's  duty  to  restrain  here- 
ticks  by  the  infliction  of  civil  penalties,  they  retained  so  much 
moderation,  as  not  to  think  that  the  punishment  could  justly 
extend  to  death,  or  mutilation,  or  even  to  the  effusion  of 
blood.  But  now  that  the  empire  was  become  christian,  there 
gradually  arose  in  it  diverse  laws  against  this  new  crime 
heresy^  which  are  still  extant  in  the  codes  of  Theodosian  and 
Justinian,  imposing  on  the  delinquents  fines,  banishments,  or 

•  For  the  scripture  import  of  blaspliemy,  and  the  narure  of  that  crime, 
see  "  Preliminary  Dissertaiions  to  a  Version  of  t]ie  four  Gospels,"  by  the 
Author,  vol.  1,  p.  395,  &c. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  ZS7. 

ponfiscations,  according  to  the  circumstances,  and  supposed 
degree,   of  the  delinquency.     All  that  regarded  the  execution 
of  those  laws,  the  trial  as  well  as  the  sentence,  devolved  on  the 
magistrate.     Only  the  nature  of  the  crime,  what  was  heresy  or 
schism,  was  determined  by  the  ecclesiastical  judge.     One  step 
in  an  evil  course  naturally  leads  to  another.     The  first  step  was 
made  when  civil  penalties  were  denounced  against  particular 
opinions  and  modes  of  thinking.     This  may  be  considered  as 
the  hrst  stage  of  the  doctrine  and  practice  of  intolerance,  ii^ 
the  christian  church.     Nor  could  any  thing  be  more  explicitly^ 
or  more  universally,  condemned  than  this  had  been,  by  the  fa- 
thers of  the  first  three  centuries,  and  several  of  the  fourth. 
Humani  juris  et  naturalis  potestatis  est^  said  TertuUian,  in  the 
beginning  of  the  third  century,  uniciiique  quod putaverit  colere^ 
and  Hilary  of  Poitiers,  in  the  fourth,  in  opposition  to  those 
who  favoured  the  interposition  of  the  magistrate.     Deus  cog- 
nitionem  sui  docuit^  potius  quam  exegit^  et  operationum  ccelestium 
admiratione,  prceceptis  suis  concilians  auctoritatem  coactam  conji- 
tendi  se  aspernatus  est  voluntatem.     Again,  Deus   universitatis 
est^  obsequio  non  eget  necessario,  non  requirit  coactam  confes- 
sionem  ;  non  falkndus  est  sed  promerendus^  simpUcitate  queer  en-' 
dus  est^  confessione  discendus  est^  charitate  amandus  est,  timore 
venerandus    est,  voluntatis  probitate  retinendus   est.     At  vera 
quid  istud,  quod  sacerdotes  timere  Deum  vincidis  coguntur,  pcenis 
jubentur  ?  Sacerdotes  carceribus  cojitiiientur  ?  Men's  system  of 
conduct  may  come,  we  see,  to  be  totally  reversed.     But  this 
is'always  the  work  of  time.     Every  advance  has  its  difficulty, 
and  is  made  with  hesitation.     But  one  difficulty  surmounted 
enaboidens  a  man,  and  renders  it  easier  for  him  to  surmount 
another.     That  again  makes  way  for  the  next,  and  so  oii  till 
the  change  be  total. 

Several  bishops  and  pastors,  who  had  not  yet  been  able  to 
divest  themselves  of  the  more  pure  and  harmless  maxim.s  of 
primitive  times,  or  rather  of  their  divine  master,  who  totally 
reprobated  all  secular  weapons  in  this  warfare,  thought,  that 
after  they  had  declared  opinions  heretical,  and  denied  their 
communion  to  those  who  held  them,  they  could  not  innocently 
intermeddle  further,  or  give  information  to  the  magistrate, 
dreading  that  such  a  conduct  would  be  irreconcileable  to  the 
great  law  of  charity.  Others  more  hardy,  (for  there  will 
always  be  such  differences  among  men)  resolved,  by  any 
means,  to  silence  such  as  they  could  not  confute,  and  to  com- 
pel those  to  dissemble,  whom  they  despaired  of  convincing; 
the  plain  language  of  which  conduct  was.  If  yve  cannot  make 
them  better,  we  will  make  them  worse, — If  they  will  not  be 
believers,  they  shall  be  hypocrites.  And  whoever  will  not  be 
induced  to  be  of  what  we  accoimt  the  family  of  God,  we  shall 


S58  LECTURES  dN 

be  sure  to  render  twofold  more  the  childreji  of  the  devil  thatt 
they  were  before. 

People  of  this  stamp,  possessed  of  a  pride,  (misnamed  zeal) 
which  cannot  brook  contradiction,  were  forward  in  giving  in- 
formation to  the  magistrate  on  those  whom  they  called  here- 
ticks,  and  in  prompting  him,   where  there  appeared  a  remiss- 
ness,  to  inffict  the  punishments  which  the  imperial  edicts  had 
denounced.     To  such  are  these  words  of  Hilary  very  perti- 
nently addressed  :   Misereri  licet  nostrce  cetatis  lahorem^  et  prcE' 
sentium  temporum  stultas  opinioncs  congemiscere^  quibus  patro- 
Cinari  Deo  humana  creduntur^  et  ad  tuendam  Christi  ecclesiam 
amhitione  seculari  laboratur.     Oro  vos^  episcopi^  quibusnam  siif- 
fraglis  ad proedicandwn  evangelium  apostoli  usi  sunt  ?  ^ibus  ad- 
juti  potestatibus  Christum  prcedicaverunt.,  gentasque  fere  omnes 
ex  idolis  ad  Deum  tra?istu/erimt  ?  Anne  aliquam  sibi  assumebant 
e  palatio  dignitatem^  hymnum  Deo  in  carcere  inter  catenas  et 
jlagella  cantantes  ^  Edictisque  regis   Paidus   Christo  ecclesiam 
congregabat  P  Nerone  se^  credo ^  out  Vespasiano  patrocinantibus^ 
tuebatur^  quorum  in  nos  odiis  confessio  divince  prcedicationis  ef- 
Jlaruit  P  At  nunc^  proh  dolor  !  divinam  Jidem  suffragia  terrena 
commendant  inopsque  virtutis  suae  Christus^  dum  ambitio  nomini 
suo  conciliatur,  arguitur.      'Ferret  exiliis  et  carceribus  ecclesia^ 
credique  sibi  cogit^  quce  exiliis  et  carceribus  credita  est ;  pendtt  a 
dignatione  communicantium^  quce  persequentium  est  consecrata 
terror e  ;  fugat  sacer dotes ^  quce  fug atis  est  sacerdotibus  propa- 
gata^  diligi  sese  gloriatur  a  mundo^  quce  Christi  esse  non  potuit, 
nisi  mundus  earn   odisset.     Such  were   the  sentiments   of  St. 
Hilary,  for  he  has  obtained  a  place  in  the  kalendar,  which  I 
take  notice  of  the  rather,  that  we  may  perceive,  in  the  stronger 
light,  the  different  temperaments  which  prevailed  in  the  saints 
acknowledged  by  Rome,  who  belong  to  different  ages.     Light 
and  darkness  are  not  more  opposite  than  the  spirit  of  a  Su 
Hilary,  in  the  fourth  century,  and  the  spirit  of  a  St.  Dominick, 
the  inventor  of  the   inquisition,   and  the  butcher  of  the  Albi- 
genses,  in  the  thirteenth.     But  this  by  the  vi^ay.     I  return  to 
the  early  times. 

It  happened,  not  often  at  first,  that  on  account  of  sedition, 
real  or  pretended,  the  person  accused  of  heresy  was  punished 
capitally.  This,  if  people  were  not  satisfied  of  the  reality  of 
the  sedition,  rarely  failed,  for  some  ages,  to  raise  against  the 
informers,  especially  if  pastors,  much  clamour  and  scandal. 
Our  Lord's  words,  /  came  not  to  destroy  merits  lives ^  but  to 
^ave  them^  had  not  yet  totally  lost  their  force  among  christians. 
The  spirit  of  the  master,  and  that  of  the  servant,  made  too 
glaring  a  contrast  to  escape  the  notice  of  those  who  had  any 
knowledge  and  reflection.  Indeed,  for  several  ages,  those 
ministers  who  thought  themselves  warranted  to  call  in  the  se- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  35> 

pular  arm,  did  not  think  themselves  authorized  to  proceed  so 
far,  as  to  be  aiding  in  what  might  affect  either  life  or  members. 
They  therefore  abstained  not  only  from  giving  information 
where  there  was  any  danger  of  this  kind,  but  from  appearing 
at  the  secular  tribunal  in  any  capacity,  unless  that  of  interces- 
sor in  behalf  of  the  accused.  And  this  office  was  not  in  them, 
as  it  is  in  the  clergy  of  some  Romish  countries  at  present, 
under  a  disguise  of  mercy,  quite  transparent,  a  downright  in- 
sult upon  misery.  But  a  long  tract  of  time  was  necessary  be- 
fore matters  could  be  brought  to  this  pass.  St.  Martin,  in 
France,  (another  instance  of  humanity  and  moderation,  even 
in  those  whom  Rome  now  adores  as  saints)  excommunicated  a 
bishop  in  the  fifth  century,  for  accusing  certain  hereticks  to 
the  usurper  Maximus,  by  whose  means  he  procured  their 
death.  That  worthy  minister  declared,  that  he  considered 
any  man  as  a  murderer,  who  was  accessary  to  the  death  of 
another,  for  being  unfortunate  enough  to  be  mistaken  in  his 
opinions.  On  this  foot,  however,  things  remained  till  the 
year  800.  It  belonged  to  councils  and  synods  to  determine 
what  is  heresy,  but  (except  in  what  relates  to  church  censures) 
the  trial,  as  well  as  the  punishment,  of  the  heretick,  was  in 
the  magistrate.  Neither  was  the  punishment  legally  capital, 
unless  when  the  heresy  was  accompanied  with  crimes  against 
the  state.  That  this  pretence  was  often  made  without  foun- 
dation, by  men  of  an  intolerant  temper,  there  is  little  ground 
to  doubt. 

About  this  time  happened  what  is  called  the  great  schism 
of  the  east,  the  breach  betwixt  the  Greek  and  the  Latin 
churches,  since  which  time,  till  the  destruction  of  the  eastern 
empire  by  tlie  Turks,  the  cause  of  heresy  and  schism  remained 
in  the  Greek  churches  on  the  same  footing  as  before.  In  the 
west,  however,  it  has  undergone  immense  alterations;  inso- 
much, that  the  popular  sentiments  concerning  zeal  and  charity 
have  long  stood  in  direct  opposition  to  those  which  obtained, 
and  rendered  the  christian  character  so  completely  amiable,  as 
well  as  venerable,  in  the  days  of  the  martyrs.  Indeed,  for 
$ome  centuries,  particularly  the  eighth,  ninth,  and  tenth,  re- 
markable for  nothing  so  much  as  the  vilest  superstition  and 
grossest  ignorance,  and  for  insurrections,  revolutions,  and 
confusions,  every  where,  hereticks  and  sectaries  made  but  lit- 
tle noise,  and  were  as  little  minded.  With  the  revival  oi 
knowledge,  even  in  its  dawn,  these  also  revived.  There  is  no 
human  blessing  without  some  foil.  But  considering  the  gross- 
ness  of  the  reigning  superstition,  one  might  be  at  a  loss  to 
say,  whether  any  new  absurdity  could  be,  comparatively,  pro- 
nounced an  evil.  Whatever  served  to  rouse  men  out  of  theii: 
letliargy,  seemed  to  promise  good  in  its  consequenqes. 


360  *  LECTURES  ON 


LECTURE  XXVL 


jfxFTER  the  year  1100,  in  consequence  of  the  perpetual 
jars  which  had  been  betwixt  the  popes  and  emperours  for 
more  than  fifty  years  back,  and  which  still  subsisted,  and  in 
consequence  of  the  frequent  wars  and  scandals  in  the  christian 
world,  and  the  irreligious  lives  of  the  clergy,  innumerable  he- 
reticks  sprang  up,  whose  heresies  (as  they  are  called)  were 
commonly  levelled  against  ecclesiastical  authority,  the  abuse 
of  which  was,  indeed,  so  excessive,  and  so  flagrant,  as  to  give 
but  too  much  weight  with  every  body,  to  the  severest  re- 
proaches that  could  be  uttered.  All  attacks  upon  received 
doctrines  mast  ultimately  affect  the  power  by  which  they  are 
established.  But  when  the  assault  is  made  directly  on  that 
power,  the  fabrick  of  church  authority  is  in  the  most  imminent 
danger.  The  aim  of  the  former  is  only  to  make  a  breach  in 
the  wall  of  the  edifice,  but  that  of  the  latter  is  an  attempt  to 
sap  the  foundation.  As  we  have  seen  all  along  that  the  dar- 
ling object  of  Rome  is  power,  to  which  every  other  considera- 
tion is  made  to  yield,  we  may  believe  that  attempts  of  this 
kind  would  excite  a  more  than  ordinary  resentment.  This, 
in  fact,  was  the  consequence :  an  unusual  degree  of  rancour 
in  the  ecclesiasticks,  more  especially  in  the  pontiff  and  his 
minions,  mingled  itself  with  their  bigotry  or  mistaken  zeal, 
{for  it  would  be  unjust  to  impute  the  effect  to  either  cause 
separately)  and  produced  the  many  bloody,  and,  till  then,  un, 
exampled  scenes  of  cruelty,  which  ensued.  The  popes,  by 
letter,  frequently  excited  the  bishops  as  well  as  princes,  the 
bishops  instigated  the  magistrates,  by  all  possible  means,  to 
subdue  or  exterminate  the  enemies  of  the  church.  When  the 
number  of  these  enemies  was  so  great,  that  it  vras  impossible 


ECCLEStAS  riCAL  HISTORY.  361 

to  attain  this  end  by  means  of  judicatories,  civil  or  ecclesias- 
tical, princes  were  enjoined,  on  pain  of  excommunicationj 
interdict,  deprivation,  &c.,  to  make  war  upon  them,  and  extir- 
pate them  by  fire  and  sword.  And  in  order  to  allure,  by  re- 
wards, as  well  as  terrify  by  punishments,  the  same  indulgences 
and  privileges  were  bestowed  on  them  who  engaged  in  those 
holy  battles,  and  with  equal  reason,  as  had  been  bestowed  on 
the  crusaders,  who  fought  for  the  recovery  of  the  holy  sepul- 
chre against  the  Saracens  in  the  east« 

It  was  not  till  the  year  1200  that  the  names  inqmsition  into 
heresy,  and  inquisitor^  were  heard  of.  The  bishops  and  their 
vicars  being,  in  the  pope's  apprehension,  neither  so  fit  nor  so 
diligent  as  he  desired  and  thought  necessary  in  such  a  cause, 
there  were,  at  that  time,  opportunely  for  his  purpose,  two  ne\V 
orders  of  regulars  instituted,  those  of  St.  Dominick,  and  those 
of  St.  Francis,  both  zealously  devoted  to  the  church,  and  men 
with  whom  the  advancement  of  Christianity,  and  the  exaltation 
of  the  pontifical  power,  were  terms  perfectly  synonymous^ 
To  St.  Dominick,  indeed,  the  honour  of  first  suggesting  the 
erection  of  this  extraordinary  court,  the  inquisition,  is  com- 
monly ascribed.  It  was  not,  however,  in  the  beginning,  on  the 
same  footing  on  which  it  has  been  settled  since,  and  still  conti- 
nues. The  first  inquisitors  Were  vested  with  a  double  capacity, 
not  very  happily  conjoined  in  the  same  persons  ;  one  was, 
that  of  preachers,  to  convince  the  hereticks  by  argument ;  the 
other,  that  of  persecutors,  to  instigate  magistrates,  without 
intermission,  to  employ  every  possible  method  of  extirpating 
the  contumacious,  that  is,  all  such  as  were  unreasonable  enough 
not  to  be  convinced  by  the  profound  reasonings  of  those  mer- 
ciless fanaticks  and  wretched  sophisters.  I  may  add  a  third, 
that  of  being  spies  for  Rome,  on  the  bishops,  on  the  secular* 
powers,  and  on  the  people,  both  Romish  and  heretical*  They 
had  it  in  charge  to  make  strict  inquiry,  and  report  to  his  holi- 
ness the  number  and  quality  of  the  hereticks,  the  zeal  disco- 
vered in  those  called  catholicks,  the  diligence  of  the  bishops, 
and  the  forwardness  or  backwardness  which  they  found  in  the 
secular  powers,  to  comply  with  the  desires  of  the  pope.  It 
was  from  this  part  of  their  charge  in  particular,  that  they  were 
denominated  inquisitors.  They  had,  however,  no  tribunals. 
Only  they  stirred  up  judges  to  banish,  or  otherwise  chastise 
those  hereticks,  whom  they  brought  before  them.  Sometimes 
they  excited  potentates  to  arm  their  subjects  against  them  ;  at 
other  times  they  addressed  themselves  to  the  mob,  and  inflam- 
ed the  populace  whom  they  headed,  to  arm  themselves,  and 
join  together  in  extirpating  them.  For  this  purpose  they  put  a 
cross  of  cloth  upon  the  garments  of  those,  who  were  willing 

z  z 


362  LECTURES  ON 

to  devote  themselves  to  this  service,  and  titled  them  crusaders. 
This  badge  (for  a  nadge  in  such  cases  is  of  great  consequence, 
it  matters  little  what  it  be,  whether  a  red  cross,  or  a  blue 
cockade)  operated  like  a  charm  on  those  holy  idiots,  (pardon 
the  misapplication  of  the  epithet  holy  in  conformity  to  the 
style  of  the  barbarians  spoken  of)  and  gave  the  finishing 
stroke  to  their  delusion.  If  they  were  inflamed  before,  they 
now  became  infuriate,  and  raised  to  a  supercelestial  sort  of 
virtue,  which  defies  all  the  humbler  restraints  of  reason  and 
humanity.  In  this  way  things  continued  till  the  year  1250, 
that  is,  for  half  a  century. 

The  attempts  of  the  fathers  inquisitors  during  that  period, 
were  greatly  aided  by  the  emperour  Frederick  the  second, 
who,  in  the  year  1224,  being  in  Padua,  had  promulged  four 
edicts  in  relation  to  this  matter,  taking  the  inquisitors  under 
his  protection,  imposing  on  obstinate  hereticks  the  punishment 
of  fire,  and  perpetual  imprisonment  on  the  penitent,  commit- 
ting the  cognizance  of  the  crime  to  the  ecclesiastical,  and  the 
condemnation  of  the  criminal  to  the  secular  judges.  This 
was  the  first  law  which  made  heresy  capital.  This,  however, 
at  first,  by  reason  of  the  circumstances  of  the  times  and  the 
differences  which  soon  arose  betwixt  the  pope  and  the  empe- 
rour, had  not  all  the  effect  that  might  have  been  expected  from 
it.  However,  it  proved  very  pernicious  in  example,  in  de- 
nouncing against  heresy  the  punishment  of  death,  to  which, 
before  that  time,  it  had  never  been  by  law  subjected.  The 
example  was,  besides,  of  a  most  cruel  death  ;  which,  never- 
theless, came  gradually  to  be  adopted,  almost  universally,  into 
the  laws  of  other  countries. 

After  the  death  of  Frederick,  which  happened  about  the 
middle  of  the  century,  pope  Innocent  the  fourth  remaining, 
as  it  were,  sole  arbiter  of  affairs  in  Lombardy,  and  iome 
other  parts  of  Italy,  applied  his  mind  to  the  extirpation  of 
heresies,  which,  during  the  late  troubles  in  the  state,  had  in- 
creased exceedingly.  And,  considering  the  labour  which  had 
hitherto  been  employed  in  this  service,  by  the  Franciscan 
friars,  as  well  as  the  Dominican,  whose  zeal  and  diligence, 
unrestrained  by  either  the  respect  of  persons,  or  the  fear  of 
dangers,  by  any  regards  to  justice,  or  feelings  of  humanity, 
recommended  them  highly  to  the  pontiff;  he  judged  it  the 
surest  remedy,  to  avail  himself  of  their  ardour  and  abilities, 
not  as  formerly,  in  preachin  ;,  or  even  enlisting  crusaders,  and 
inflicting  military  executior ,  but  by  erecting  them  into  a  stand- 
ing tribunal,  with  very  ( xtensive  authority,  and  no  other 
charge  than  that  of  the  expurgation  of  heretical  pravity. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  363 

There  were  two  objections  against  this  expedient.  One 
was,  that  this  judicatory  appeared  an  encroachment  on  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  ordinary,  or  bishop  of  the  place  ;  the  other 
was,  that  it  was  unprecedented,  that  the  secular  magistrate, 
to  whom  the  punishment  of  hereticks  was  committed,  should 
be  excluded  from  the  trial  and  judgment.  All  the  imperial 
laws  hitherto,  even  the  last  severe  law  of  Frederick,  and  the 
municipal  statutes  of  every  country,  had  put  the  cognizance 
of  the  fact,  and  the  trial  of  the  accused,  though  not  the  des- 
cription of  the  crime,  into  the  hands  of  the  magistrate.  For 
removing  the  first  difficulty,  the  pope  devised  this  tempera- 
ment :  he  made  the  tribunal  consist  of  the  inquisitor,  and  the 
bishop  of  the  place  ;  .wherein,  however,  the  inquisitor  was  not 
only  to  be  principal,  but,  in  effect,  every  thing,  the  bishop 
having  little  more  than  the  name  of  a  judge.  For  removing 
the  second,  and  in  order  to  give  some  appearance  of  authority 
to  the  secular  powers,  they  were  allowed  to  appoint  the  officers 
to  the  inquisition,  but  still  with  the  approbation  of  the  inqui- 
sitors, and  to  send  with  the  inquisitor,  when  he  should  go  in- 
to the  country,  one  of  their  assessors,  whom  the  inquisitors 
should  choose.  A  third  part  of  the  confiscations  was  to  go  to 
the  community,  in  return  for  which  the  community  was  to  be 
at  all  the  expense  of  keeping  the  prisons,  supporting  the  pri- 
soners, &c.  These  things  made  the  magistrate,  in  appear- 
ance, co-ordinate  with  the  inquisitor,  but,  in  reality,  his  ser- 
vant. The  infliction  of  the  legal  punishment  was  also  in  the 
magistrate,  after  the  heretick  had  been  tried  and  condemned 
by  the  inquisitors.  But  this  was  so  much  a  thing  of  course, 
and  which  he  well  knew  he  could  not  avoid  executing,  with- 
out incurring  the  vengeance  of  the  church,  that  in  this  he  was, 
in  fact,  no  better  than  the  spiritual  judge's  executioner.  His 
office  was,  in  no  respect,  magisterial,  it  was  merelv  servile. 

On  this  footing  the  inquisition  was  erected  in  the  year  1251, 
in  those  provinces  in  Italy  most  under  the  pope's  eye,  Roma-, 
nia,  Lombardy,  Marca  Trevigiana,  and  intrusted  to  Domi'» 
nican  friars.  Afterwards  it  Vv-as  extended  to  more  distant  pro- 
vinces. Thirty-one  rules,  or  articles,  defining  the  powers 
and  jurisdiction,  and  regulating  the  procedure  of  this  new 
judicatory,  were  devised  ;  and  all  rulers  and  magistrates  were 
commanded,  by  a  bull  issued  for  the  purpose,  to  give,  under 
pain  of  excommunication  and  interdicts,  punctual  obedience,, 
and  every  possible  assistance  to  this  hoK'  court.  The  inquisi'* 
tors  were  empowered  to  fulminate  against  the  refractory. 

Afterwards,  in  the  \ear  1484,  king  Ferdinand  the  catholick, 
'having  put  a  period  tc  the  reign  of  the  Mahometans  in  Gra- 


364'  LECTURES  ON 

nada,  did,  to  purge  his  own,  and  his  consort  Elizabeth's  do- 
minions, from  both  Moors  and  Jews,  erect,  with  consent  of 
pope  Sextus  the  fourth,  a  tribunal  of  inquisition  in  all  the 
kingdoms  possessed  by  him,  which  took  cognizance  not  only 
of  Judaism  and  mahometism,  but  also  of  heresy  and  witch- 
craft. The  form  of  the  judicatory  then  introduced,  and  still 
remaining  there  is,  that  the  king  nominates  an  ecclesiastick 
to  be  general  inquisitor  for  all  his  dominions,  and  his  holiness 
confirms  him,  if  he  approve  the  choice  ;  for  he  may  reject 
him  if  he  please.  The  inquisitor  named  by  the  king,  and  con- 
firmed by  the  pontiff,  names  the  particular  inquisitors  destined 
for  every  place,  who,  before  entering  on  their  office,  must  ob- 
tain the  royal  approbation.  The  king,  besides,  deputes  a 
council,  or  senate  over  this  business,  who  sit  where  the  court 
resides,  and  of  which  the  inquisitor  general  is  president.  This 
council  has  supreme  jurisdiction,  makes  new  regulations  when 
it  sees  occasion,  determines  differences  between  particular 
inquisitors,  punishes  the  faults  of  their  officers,  and  receives 
appeals.  From  Spain  it  extended  to  its  dependences,  and 
was  introduced  into  Sicily,  Sardinia,  and  the  Indies. 

Attempts,  however,  of  this  kind,  have  not  proved  equally 
successful  in  all  Roman  Catholick  states,  or  even  the  greater 
part  of  them.  It  was  never  in  the  power  of  the  pope  to  ob- 
tain the  establishment  of  this  tribunal  in  many  of  the  most 
populous  countries  in  subjection  to  the  see  of  Rome.  In 
some  it  was  introduced,  and  soon  after  expelled,  in  such  a 
manner  as  effectually  to  preclude  a  renewal  of  the  attempt. 
The  difficulties  arose  from  two  causes  ;  one  was,  the  conduct 
of  the  inquisitors,  and  their  immoderate  severity,  as  well  as 
their  unbounded  extortion  and  avarice,  to  which  I  may  add, 
the  propensity  they  showed,  on  every  occasion,  to  extend,  be- 
yond measure,  their  own  authority;  insomuch,  that  they  were 
proceeding  to  engross,  on  one  pretext  or  other,  all  the  crimi- 
nal jurisdiction  of  the  magistrate.  Under  heresy,  they  in- 
sisted that  injideUtij^  blasphemy^  perjury^  sorcery^  poisonings 
bigamy^  usury^  were  comprehended.  I'he  other  cause  was, 
that  the  tribunal  was  found  to  be  so  burdensome,  that  the 
community  refused  to  be  at  the  expense.  In  several  places  it 
was  found  necessary  to  ease  the  publick  of  this  charge,  and  iij 
order  to  abate  somewhat  of  the  excessive  rigour,  which  had 
raised  so  much  clamour  against  it,  a  greater  share  of  the 
power  was  given  to  the  bishop.  These  things  served  to  faci- 
litate its  introduction  into  Tuscany  and  Arragon,  and  even  in- 
to some  cities  of  1'  ranee  ;  but  in  this  last  country  it  was  not 
long  permitted  to  remain. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  3$^ 

It  is  not  entirely  on  the  same  footing  m  the  difFereat 
places  where  it  has  been  received.  In  Spain  and  Portugal 
this  scourge  and  disgrace  of  humanity  glares,  monster  like, 
with  its  most  frightful  aspect.  In  Rome  it  is  much  more 
tolerable.  Papal  avarice  has  served  to  counterbalance  pap^l 
tyranny,  and,  in  defect  of  a  better  principle,  produced  what^ 
if  it  do  not  deserve  the  name,  has  some  of  the  good  conse- 
quences of  moderation.  The  wealth  of  modern  Rome  arise^s 
very  much  from  the  constant  resort  of  strangers  of  all  coun- 
tries and  denominations,  and,  for  the  most  part,  of  the  highej" 
ranks.  Nothing  would  prove  a  more  effectual  check  to  that 
resort,  and,  consequently,  to  the  unceasing  influx  of  riches 
into  that  capital,  than  such  a  horrid  tribunal  as  those  which, 
from  Lisbon  and  Madrid,  diffuse  a  terrour  which  is  felt  in 
the  utmost  confines  of  those  miserable  kingdoms.  In  Venice 
it  is,  indeed,  as  moderate  as  it  is  possible  for  a  judicatory  to 
be,  which  is  founded  on  a  principle  not  more  false  than  tyran- 
nical, that  men  are  responsible  for  their  opinions  to  any 
human  tribunal.  But  the  particular  constitution  of  that  court 
was  settled  by  an  express  stipulation  between  the  pontiff  and 
the  state.  The  Venetian  senate  would  not  admit  an  inquisi- 
tion into  their  dominions  on  any  other  terms,  than  such  as 
secured  at  least  some  regard  to  justice  and  humanity  in  their 
proceedings,  and  prevented  them  from  extending  their  juris- 
diction beyond  the  original  limits,  or  arriving  at  an  indepen- 
dency on  the  secular  powers.  With  so  much  caution  and 
jealousy  did  that  wise  aristocracy  guard  against  the  encroach^ 
ment  of  the  church. 

It  is  no  more  than  doing  justice  to  many  Roman  Catholick 
states  to  acknowledge,  that  they  are  almost  as  much  enemies 
to  that  infernal  tribunal,  as  even  protestants  themselves.  Nor 
can  I  in  this  be  justly  accused  of  advancing  any  thing  rashly, 
the  tumults  which  the  attempts  to  introduce  it  into  some  parts 
of  Italy,  Milan  and  Naples  in  particular,  and  afterwards  into 
France,  and  other  countries  called  catholick,  and  its  actual 
expulsion  from  some  places,  when,  to  appearance,  settled,  are 
the  strongest  evidences  of  the  general  sentiments  of  the 
people  concerning  it.  It  is  only  to  be  regretted,  that  those 
who,  in  this  matter,  think  as  we  do,  should  be  inconsistent 
enough  to  imagine,  that  a  despotism,  which  required  for  its 
Support  such  diabolical  engines,  could,  with  any  propriety,  be 
said  to  come  from  God;  But  so  far  have  those  called  chris- 
tians departed  from  the  simplicity  that  is  in  Christ,  that  they 
will  admit  any  rule  forjudging  of  the  title  of  prophets,  or 
teachers,  in  divine  things,  rather  than  the  rule  given  by  him 
whom  they  call  Master.     Bi/  their  fruits  shall  ijou  know  them. 


366  LECTURES  ON 

Do  men  gather  grapes  of  thorns^  or  Jigs  of  thistles  ?  No  test, 
of  a  divine  mission,  if  Jesus  Christ  may  be  credited,  is  of  any 
significance  without  this. 

It  may  not  be  improper  to  conclude  our  account  of  the 
origin  of  the  inquisition,  with  a  few  things  in  illustration  of 
the  spirit  in  which  it  proceeds^  thai  every  one  may  have  it  in 
his  power  to  judge,  whether  the  relation  it  bears  to  the  spirit 
of  Christ  be  denominated  more  properly  resemblance,  or  con- 
trariety. It  is  so  far  from  following  the  rules  of  almost  all 
other  tribunals,  where  any  regard  is  shown  to  equity,  or  the 
rights  of  human  nature,  thaty  in  every  respect,  where  the  ec- 
clesiastick  power  has  not  been  checked  by  the  secular,  those 
rules  have  been  reversed.  The  account  is  entirely  just,  as 
far  as  it  goes,  which  is  given  by  Voltaire  of  the  Spanish 
inquisition,  and  he  might  have  added,  of  the  Portuguese,  for 
both  are  on  the  same  model.  "  Their  form  of  proceeding 
is  an  infallible  way  to  destroy  whomsoever  the  inquisitors 
please."  And  let  it  be  observed,  that  they  have  strong  mo- 
tives for  destroying  a  rich  culprit,  as  their  sentence  of  con- 
demnation is  followed  by  the  confiscation  of  all  his  estate, 
real  and  personal,  of  which  two-thirds  go  to  the  church,  and 
one-third  to  the  state  ;  so  that  it  may  be  said,  with  the 
strictest  propriety,  that  the  judges  themselves  are  parties, 
having  a  personal  interest  in  the  issue  against  the  prisoner, 
**  The  prisoners  are  not  confronted  with  the  accuser  or  in- 
former." Nay,  they  are  not  so  much  as  told  who  it  is  that 
informs.  His  name  is  kept  secret  to  encourage  the  trade  of 
informing.  And,  surely,  a  better  expedient  could  not  have 
been  devised  for  promoting  this  dark  business,  than  by  thus 
securing  at  once  concealment  and  gratification,  with  impunity, 
to  private  malice,  envy,  and  revenge.  Further,  "  there  is 
**  no  informer,  or  witness,  who  is  not  listened  to.  A  public^ 
**  convict,  a  notorious  malefactor,  an  infamous  person,  a  com- 
*'  mon  prostitute,  a  child,  are  in  the  holy  office,  though  no 
*'  where  else,  creditable  accusers  and  witnesses.  Even  the 
*'  son  mav  depose  against  his  father,  the  wife  against  her 
*'  husband."  The  detection  of  the  grossest  prevarication  in 
the  delator  and  witnesses  is  hardly  ever  punished,  unless  with 
a  very  gentle  rebuke  ;  let  it  be  observed,  by  the  way,  that  to 
the  profligate  and  abandoned  they  can  be  very  gentle,  for  they 
dread,  above  all  things,  to  do  aught  that  might  discourage 
informers,  spies,  and  witnesses.  And  that  there  may  be  no 
risk  of  a  want  of  information,  they  have,  in  all  parts  of  the 
kingdom,  spies  of  all  different  qualities,  who  are  denominated 
the  familiars  of  the  holy  office,  a  place  of  which  even  men  of 
high  rank  are  sometimes  ambitious,  from  different  motives. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY*  367 

some  for  the  greater  personal  security,  others  because  it  em- 
powers them  to  take  a  severe  revenge  on  their  enemies,  and 
others,  no  doubt,  because  they  think  they  do  God  good  ser- 
vice. The  wretched  prisoner  is  no  more  made  acquainted 
with  his  crime  than  with  his  accuser.  His  being  told  the  one, 
might  possibly  lead  him  to  guess  the  other.  To  avoid  this, 
he  is  compelled,  by  tedious  confinement,  in  a  noisome  dun^^ 
geon,  where  he  never  sees  a  face  but  the  jailor's,  and  is  not 
permitted  the  use  either  of  books,  or  of  pen  and  ink,  or,  when 
confinement  does  not  succeed,  he  is  compelled,  by  a  train  of 
the  most  excruciating  tortures,  ''  to  inform  against  himself; 
*'  to  divine  and  to  confess  the  crime  laid  to  his  charge,  of 
*'  which  often  he  is  ignorant."  An  effectual  method  to  bring 
nine-tenths  of  mankind  to  confess  any  thing,  true  or  false, 
which  may  gratify  their  tormentors,  and  put  an  end  to  their 
misery.  *'  This  procedure,"  adds  our  historian,  "  unheard 
*'  of  till  the  institution  of  this  court,  makes  the  whole  king- 
**  dom  tremble.  Suspicion  reigns  in  every  breast.  Friend- 
"  ship  and  openness  are  at  an  end.  The  brother  dreads  his 
*'  brother,  the  father  his  son.  Hence  taciturnity  is  become 
**  the  characteristick  of  a  nation  endued  with  all  the  vivacity 
*'  natural  to  the  inhabitants  of  a  warm  and  fruitful  climate, 
**  To  this  tribunal  we  must  likewise  impute  that  profound  ig- 
**  norance  of  sound  philosophy,  in  which  Spain  lies  buried, 
"  whilst  Germany,  England,  France,  and  even  Italy,  have  dis- 
**  covered  so  many  truths,  and  enlarged  the  sphere  of  our 
"  knowledge.  Never  is  human  nature  so  debased,  as  where 
**  ignorance  is  armed  with  power." 

In  regard  to  the  extent  of  power  given  to  inquisitors  by 
papal  bulls,  and  generally  admitted  by  the  secular  authority  in 
those  countries  where  the  inquisition  is  established,  I  shall 
give  the  few  following  instances  out  of  many  that  might  be 
produced.  First,  it  is  ordered,  that  the  convicts  be  burnt 
alive,  and  in  publick  ;  and  that  all  they  have  be  confiscated ; 
all  princes  and  rulers  who  refuse  their  concurrence  in  execu- 
ting these  and  the  other  sentences  authorized  by  the  church, 
shall  be  brougL.  under  censure,  that  is,  anathematized  and 
excommunicated,  their  states  or  kingdoms  laid  under  an  inter- 
dict, &c.  The  house  also,  in  which  the  heretick  is  appre- 
hended, must  be  razed  to  the  ground,  even  though  it  be  not 
his,  but  the  property  of  a  person  totally  unsuspected.  This 
ferocious  kind  of  barbarity,  so  utterly  irreconcilable  to  all  the 
principles  of  equity,  is,  nevertheless,  extremely  politick,  as  it 
is  a  powerful  means  of  raising  horrour  in  the  ignorant  popu- 
lace, and  of  increasing  the  awe  of  this  tribunal  in  men  of  all 
denominations,  who  must  consider  it  as  extremely  dangerous 


sm  LECTURES  ON 

to  have  the  smallest  connexion  with  any  pferson  sfQspected  o£ 
heresy,  or  so  much  as  to  admit  him  into  their  houses.  The 
inquisitors  are  also  empowered  to  demand  of  any  person 
whom  they  suspect,  (and,  for  their  suspicions,  they  are  not 
obliged  to  give  a  reason)  that  he  solemnly  adjure  heretical 
opinions,  ?.nd  even  give  pecuniary  security  that  he  shall  con- 
tinue? a  good  catholick.  The  court  of  inquisition  are  also 
priviL;ged  to  have  their  own  guards,  and  are  authorized  to 
give  licences  to  others  to  carry  arms,  and  to  enlist  crusaders. 
One  of  Paul  the  ivth's  bulls  does  not  allow  a  reprieve  froiA 
the  sentence  to  one  who,  on  the  first  conviction,  recants  his 
opinion,  if  the  heresy  be  in  any  of  the  five  articles  mentioned 
i"n  that  bull.  But  what  is,  if  possible,  still  more  intolerable, 
is  that,  by  a  bull  of  Pius  the  vth,  no  sentence  in  favour  of  the 
accused  shall  be  held  a  final  acquittal,  though  pronounced 
after  canonical  purgation  ;  but  the  holy  office  shall  have  it  ill 
their  power,  though  no  new  evidence  or  presumption  has  ap- 
peared, to  recommence  the  trial,  on  the  very  same  grounds 
thev  had  examined  formerly.  This  ordinance  ensures  to  the 
wretch  who  has  been  once  accused,  a  course  of  terrour  and 
rorraent  for  life,  from  which  no  discovery  of  innocence,  though 
clear  as  day,  no  judgment  of  the  court  can  release  him. 
Another  bull  of  the  same  pontiff  ordains,  that  whoever  shall 
behave  injuriously,  or  so  much  as  threaten  a  notary,  or  other 
servant  of  the  inquisition,  or  a  witness  examined  in  the  court, 
shall,  beside  excommunication,  be  held  guiltv  of  high  treason, 
be  punished  capitally,  his  goods  confiscated,  his  children  ren- 
dered infamous,  and  incapable  of  succeeding  to  any  body  by 
testament.  Every  one  is  subjected  to  the  same  punishment, 
who  makes  an  escape  out  of  the  prison  of  the  office,  or  who 
attempts,  though  unsuccessfully,  to  make  it ;  and  whoever 
favours  or  intercedes  for  any  such.  In  these  clauses,  persons 
of  the  highest  rank,  even  princes,  are  comprehended. 

Every  one  must  be  sensible,  that  there  is  something  in  the 
constitution  of  this  tribunal  so  monstrouslv  unjust,  so  exorbi- 
tantly cruel,  that  it  is  matter  of  astonishment,  that  in  any 
country,  the  people,  as  well  as  the  secular  powers,  would  not 
rather  have  encountered  any  danger,  than  have  submitted  to 
receive  it.  Nor  can  there  be  a  stronger  evidence  of  the 
brutish  ignorance,  as  well  as  gross  depravity  of  any  nation, 
than  that  such  a  judicatory  has  an  establishment  among  them. 
The  exorbitance  of  their  power,  as  well  as  the  pernicious  ten- 
dency of  their  rules,  are,  in  effect,  acknowledged  by  their  su- 
periours  at  Rome.  In  a  directory  printed  there,  by  authority, 
i'n  1584,  it  is  said  expresslv,  that  if  the  inquisitors  were  re- 
solved to  exercise  their  power  in  its  utmost  extent,  they  couH, 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  369 

\vith  facility,  drive  the  whole  people  into  rebellion.  Now  if 
the  power  be  so  excessive  and  so  hazardous,  what  shall  we  say, 
to  this  additional  circumstance  that  attends  it,  that  it  is,  in 
Several  instances,  so  ill  defined,  as  to  furnish  a  pretext  to  him 
who  is  possessed  of  it,  whenever  his  ambition  or  inclination 
leads  him,  of  stretching  it  to  any  extent.  This,  indeed,  may 
be  said  to  be  consequent  on  all  exorbitant  powej.  Though 
all  the  power  of  a  state  or  nation  be  not  formally  given  to  one 
jparticular  branch  or  member,  if  so  much  is  given  to  it,  that 
what  remains  is  too  weak  to  serve  as  a  control  upon  it,  the 
whole  is  virtually  given  to  it.  And  if,  in  Spain  and  Portugal, 
the  ecclesiastical  power  has  not  swallowed  up  the  secular,  and 
thereby  engrossed  the  whole  authority,  they  are  more  indebted 
to  the  light  which  has  been  diffused  through  the  rest  of  Europe, 
in  these  latter  centuries,  and  the  jealousy  of  the  other  Eu- 
ropean states,  than  to  any  remains  of  either  sense  or  virtue  in 
those  nations  themselves.  It  must  be  attended  to,  that  the 
ecclesiastick  power,  in  every  country,  which  acknowledges  the 
pope,  is  but  a  branch  of  a  foreign  jurisdiction,  namely,  that  of 
Rome.  Now  it  is  the  interest  of  the  seciUar  powers,  in  every 
kingdom  and  state,  to  take  care  that  the  foreign  power^  th«. 
papal,  (absurdly  called  the  spiritualj  do  not  quite  overwhelm 
the  temporal,  either  among  themselves,  or  in  any  other  king^ 
dom  or  state.  For  if  it  should  in  any  country,  there  would  be 
ground  to  dread,  that  with  such  acquisitions  it  might  gradually 
prove  an  overmatch  for  the  civil  powers  in  every  other.  Now 
this  is  a  danger  to  which  popish  countries  are  much  more  eX« 
posed  than  protestant.  In  the  former,  Rome  is  already  possess- 
ed of  a  considerable  share  of  jurisdiction,  and  has  great  influ<k 
ence  on  the  minds  of  the  people  ;  whereas,  in  the  latter,  she 
has  neither  jurisdiction  nor  influence  ;  andj  consequently, 
could  have  no  hold  for  effecting  a  revolution  in  her  favour. 
With  these  she  could  do  nothing  but  by  invasion  and  conquest, 
for  which,  with  all  her  advantages,  she  is  very  ill  furnished* 
That  Spain  and  Portugal,  therefore,  as  civil  powers,  are  of  any 
weight  in  the  balance  of  Europe,  they  owe  more  to  the  discern- 
ment, the  vigilance,  and  the  virtue  of  others,  than  to  their 
own. 

From  what  has  been  said,  we  may  remark  by  the  way,  the 
injustice  there  is  in  so  connecting,  or  associating  the  Romish 
religion  with  the  inquisition,  as  to  conclude,  that  to  be  a  Ro- 
manist, and  to  be  a  friend  to  that  tribunal,  denote  one  and  the 
same  thing.  The  case  is  so  far  otherwise^  that  we  are,  on  the 
best  grounds,  warranted  to  affirm,  that  nine-tenths  of  that  com- 
munion detest  the  inquisition  as  much  as  we  do.  And  of  this 
the  most  irrefragable  evidences  have  been  given  in  France,  ia 

A  a  a 


3r«  LECTURES  ON 

Germany,  and  eyen  in  Italy  itself.  How  they  should  have 
the  inconsistency,  notwithstanding  this,  to  acknowledge  a 
power  as  from  God,  which  has  found  it  necessary  to  recur  to 
expedients  so  manifestly  from  hell,  so  subversive  of  every 
principle  of  sound  morality  and  religion,  can  be  regarded  only 
as  one  of  those  contradictions,  for  which  human  characters, 
both  in  individuals  and  in  nations,  are  often  so  remarkable. 
That  the  policy  of  Rome  bears  the  marks  not  of  the  wisdom 
which  is  from  above,  which  is  first  pure,  then  peaceable,  gen- 
tle, and  easy  to  be  entreated,  full  of  mercy  and  good  fruits, 
without  partiality,  and  without  hypocrisy  ;  but  of  that  which 
flows  from  a  very  different  source,  and  is  earthly,  sensual, 
devilish,  is  so  manifest,  that  the  person  who  needs  to  be  con- 
vinced of  it,  seems  to  be  beyond  the  power  of  argument  and 
reason. 

Upon  the  whole,  how  amazingly  different,  nay,  how  per- 
fectly opposite  in  disposition,  in  maxims,  and  in  effects,  are  the 
spirit  of  primitive  Christianity,  and  the  spirit  of  modern  Rome? 
Let  any  considerate  and  ingenuous  mind  impartially  examine 
and  say.  Are  heaven  and  hell,  Christ  and  Belial,  more  adverse 
than  the  pictures  I  have,  in  this  discourse,  and  the  preceding, 
exhibited  to  your  view  ?  Let  it  be  observed  also,  that  thes.e 
are  not  caricatures  drawn  by  enemies,  but  the  genuin^e  feature}^, 
as  exhibited  in  the  works  of  their  own  authors. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  sVV 


LECTURE  XXVII. 


X'  HAVE  now  given  you  some  account  of  the  riie  and  pi^i 
gress  of  the  spirit  of  persecution  in  the  church,  and  have  par- 
ticularly traced  the  origin,  and  unfolded  the  constitution  of 
that  dreadful  tribunal,  the  inquisition.  You  must  have  per- 
ceived, that  in  every  thing  which  relates  to  the  procedure  of*^ 
that  court,  there  is  an  unrelenting  barbarity,  which  bids  de- 
fiaiice  to  all  the  principles  of  justice  ;  and  as,  in  all  respects,  it' 
is  without  example  in  past  ages,  so  I  hope  it  will  remain  with- 
out a  parallel  in  future.  The  favourers  of  ecclesiastick  ty- 
ranny, sensible  of  the  horrid  appearance  which  the  rapacity,  as 
well  as  the  ferocity  of  this  tribunal  exhibits,  and  the  very  un-v 
favourable  conclusion  it  suggests  to  the  discerning,  have  put 
their  ingenuity  to  the  rack  to  devise  reasons,  or  what  may  pass 
with  their  votaries  for  reasons,  in  support  of  it. 

According  to  Fra  Paolo,  in  his  account  of  the  inquisition  of 
Vtenice,  amongst  other  peculiarities  of  the  holy  office  in  that 
state,  which  were,  I  may  say,  extorted  by  the  secular  from  the 
ecclesiastick  power,  one  is,  that  they  do  not  admit  the  confisca- 
tion of  the  property  of  the  accused,  whether  he  be  present  and 
convicted,  or  declared  contumacious,  and  condemned  in  ab- 
sence ;  but  appoint  that  his  estate,  both  real  and  personal,  shall 
g6  to  his  lawful  heirs,  as  though  he  had  died  a  natural  death. 
He  says,  verv  justly,  in  vindication  of  this  article,  that  it  is 
always  pernicious,  to  mingle  pecuniary  matters  with  what  con- 
cerns religion,  which  ought  to  proceed  solely  from  a  view  to 
the  glory  of  God.  For  when  men  see,  that  the  2;eal  of  the 
judges,  in  consigning  hereticks  to  the  flames,  is  the  sure  means 
of  procuring  great  acquisitions  of  worldly  pelf,  it  will  be  im 
possible  to  prevent  their  being  scandalized,  or  to  persuade- 
them,  however  true,  that  the  service  of  God  was  the  sole,  oi 


3rj%  LECTURES  ON 

even  the  primary  motive.  He  adds,  the  court  of  Rome  never 
ceases,  on  every  occurrence,  to  blame  this  Venetian  ordinance, 
reckoning,  that  the  moderation  enjoyed  by  the  most  serene 
republick  reproaches  the  Roman  ordinance  with  excessive 
severity.  That,  says  he,  which  their  partisans  maintain  in 
publick  in  defence  of  their  own  practice  is,  that  heresy  is  trea- 
son against  the  divine  Majesty,  v/hich  it  is  proper  to  avenge 
more  severely  than  treason  committed  against  a  human  crea- 
ture ;  and  that  therefore  it  is  a  perversion  of  order,  when  he 
who  offends  man  receives  a  greater  punishment  than  he  who, 
offends  God.  Now  treason  against  man  is  punished  with  the 
confiscation  of  goods,  much  more  then  ought  treason  against 
God,  a  crime  always  incurred  by  heresy,  to  be  so  punished. 

I  shall  give  you  this  author's  answer,  rendered  literally  from 
his  own  words,  in  a  work  written  in  Italian,  published  at  Ve- 
nice, a  Roman  Catholick  state,  and  composed  by  order  of  the 
Doge,  the  chief  magistrate  of  the  republick,  to  whom  it  is 
dedicated.  And  I  desire  you  further  to  take  notice,  that  the 
author  is  not  only  a  Roman  Catholick,  but  a  priest,  nay,  a 
friar.  When  this  is  considered,  you  will  be  surprised  much 
more  at  what  he  controverts  with  the  advocates  of  papal  des- 
potism, than  at  what  he  yields  to  them.  "•  This  argument," 
says  he,  "  more  specious  than  solid,  is  as  a  shadow  without 
*'  a  body.  For  it  would  condemn  their  own  constitutions, 
*'  which  pardon  heresy  the  first  time,  upon  being  recanted  ; 
"  whereas  treason  against  the  sovereign  is  not,  on  any  terras, 
*'  pardoned  even  the  first  time  ;  whence  it  would  follow,  that 
"  by  their  own  reasoning,  they  make  less  account  of  offending 
**  God  than  of  offending  man.  But  the  truth  is,  that  in  im-. 
*'  posing  punishments,  respect  is  had  not  solely  to  the  heinous-, 
*'  ness  of  the  transgression,  but  to  the  attendant  circumstances 
**  of  the  injury  done  to  others,  of  the  baseness  wherewith  the 
*'  action  was  accompanied,  or  of  the  malignity  of  disposition 
*'  shown  by  it.  Royal  majesty  is  not  injured,  unless  through 
"  the  evident  malice  and  intention  of  the  offender,  whereas ; 
*'  heresy  is  commonly  the  effect  of  ignorance.  Hence  this 
*"'  almost  always  merits  compassion,  that  never.  Penalties  are 
*'  intended  more  for  an  example  to  others,  than  for  the  chas- 
*'  tisement  of  the  delinquent.  The  confiscation  of  goods  for 
"  treason  terrifies  others,  who  are  restrained,  through  love  to 
*'  their  offspring,  preferring  their  interest  to  the  gratification 
*'  of  those  passions,  which  instigate  them  against  the  prince. 
"  But  in  the  case  of  heresy,  every  one  conceives  himself  incit-.  ■ 
"  ed  by  spiritual  motives,  to  which  all  regards  to  family  ought 
*'  to  be  postponed.  1  he  event  demonstrates,  that  through 
**  divine  grace,  this  most  happy  state  of  Venice,  whose  cle- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  373 

*'  mency  gives  great  and  universal  satisfaction,  remains  as  free 
*'  from  the  tares  of  heresy,  without  pillaging  any  man,  as  other 
*'  states  where  this  pillage  is  made  with  the  utmost  rigour. 
"  Wherefore,  without  regard  to  the  rules,  examples,  or  reflec- , 
''  tions  of  others,  it  is  proper  for  us  to  preserve  those  usages, 
*'  of  whose  utility  we  are  ascertained  by  experience." 

Thus  far  our  author.  He  admits  the  argument  used  by 
Rome  to  be  specious.  And  so  it  is,  doubtless,  to  a  Roman 
Catholick.  It  falls  in  with  his  earliest  and  most  rooted  pre- 
judices, and  suits  the  mode  of  reasoning,  to  which  he  has  been. 
habituated  from  his  infancy.  To  a  judicious  and  consistent 
protestant,  it  is  a  palpable  sophism,  and  has  as  little  specious- 
ness  as  solidity.  It  is,  in  effect,  the  same  argument,  of  which 
I  showed  the  futility  in  a  former  discourse,  with  only  the 
change  of  the  term.  There  the  misapplication  was  of  the 
word  blasphemy  ;  here  it  is  of  the  word  treason.  The  abuse 
of  the  term  is,  in  this  instance,  if  possible,  still  more  flagrant, 
than  in  the  other.  In  treason  there  is  always  a  malicious  de- 
sign against  the  life  or  crown  of  the  sovereign  ;  there  is  no- 
thing analogous  to  this  in  what  they  call  heresy.  On  the  con-, 
trary,  the  principal  inducement  with  the  alleged  heretick,  to 
bear  his  suffering  patiently,  is  an  opinion  (which,  whether  true 
or  false,  is  genuinely  his  opinion)  that  he  thereby  honours  God, 
does  his  duty,  and  discharges  his  conscience.  What  they  call 
obstinacy^  he  cannot  avoid  considering  as  perseverance  and 
christian  fortittide^  both  of  which  are  incumbent,  and  very 
important  duties,  A  retractation  not  produced  by  conviction, 
but  extorted  by  terrour,  for  himself  and  his  children.,  he  does 
and  must  consider,  as  a  real  defection  from  God,  a  betraying 
of  the  rights  of  conscience  and  of  the  interests  of  truth,  as 
the  vilest  hypocrisy  and  impiety.  Nay,  it  cannot  be  consider- 
ed otherwise  even  by  his  tormentors  themselves,  who  are 
always  ready  to  acknowledge  the  guilt  of  a  false  confession, 
(to  which  they  are  doing  their  utmost  to  bring  the  prisoner). 
At  the  same  time,  I  acknowledge,  that  there  is  a  sort  of  trea- 
son in  heresy  ;  but  it  is  not  treason  against  God,  nor  is  it  trea- 
son against  the  state,  but  it  is  treason  against  the  priesthood  ; 
for  whatever  calls  its  infallibility  in  question,  as  an  avowed 
difference  in  religious  opinions  undoubtedly  does,  is  an  attack 
upon  the  hierarchy,  and,  consequently,  subversive  of  the  more 
than  royal  pretensions  of  church  authority.  This  is  the  true 
source  of  that  rancour  and  virulence,  with  which  this  ima- 
ginary crime  has  been  persecuted  by  popes  and  ecclesiasticks, 
and  by  none  more  than  bj-  those,  whose  whole  lives  bore  wit- 
ness, that  they  regarded  no  more  the  principles  than  tht-  pre^ 
cepts  of  that  religion,  for  which  they  seemed  to  be  inflamed 
with  a  zeal  so  violent. 


37^  LECTURES  ON 

r  sliallonly  add  on  this  subject,  that  if  there  were  no  other 
article,  (as  there  are  more  than  fifty)  we  should  have  here  suf=. 
ficient  ground  for  confuting  those  bold  pretensions  to  constancy 
and  uniformity  in   religious  sentiments,  in  v/hat  is  called  the 
Cfatholick  church,  with  which  the  bishop  of  Meaux  introduces 
his  history  of  the  variations   of  protestants*.     Opinions,  on 
the  subject  I' have  been  treating,  more  opposite  to  those  held 
universally  by  christians  of  the  first  three  centuries,  than  those 
openly  avowed  by  the  Romish  church  in  latter  ages,  and  stre- 
nuously supported  by  her  rulers,  it  would  be  impossible  to  con- 
ceive.    But  of  this  I  have  given  sufficient  evidence  in  the  two 
preceding  discourses.     The  difference  is,  indeed,  great  in  this 
respect,  between  romanists  of  the  two  last  ages  and  christians 
of  the  fourth  and  fifth  ;  but  in  these  there  cannot  be  said  to  be 
a  direct  contrariety.    Changes  of  this  kind  are  always  gradual. 
In  regard  to  the   present   century,  there    are  some    evident'^ 
symptoms,  that  even   in   Roman  Catholick  countries,  the  tidei* 
of  opinion  on   these  articles   begins   to   turn,  and  that  theii"' 
notions  are   becoming  daily  more  favourable  to  right  reason, 
justice,  and  humanity.     Every  sincere  protesttmt  will  rejoice 
in  the   change.     But  how  much,   on  the   other  hand,  will  it 
prove  to  such  a  subject  of  heart-felt  sorrow,  when  he  sees,  in 
any  protestant  nation,  (as  sometimes  undeniably  happens,  and* 
of  which  we  had  some  terrible  examples  in  this  very  island,  nd.^ 
farther  back  than  the   years  seventeen  hundred  and  seventy-' 
nine,  and  eighty)  a  strong  propensity  to  those  very  principles,; 
which  are  the  surest  badge  of  spiritual  tyranny,  and  have  long| 
remained  the   distinguishing  disgrace  of  Roman  usurpation, 

I  have  now  illustrated,  with  as  much  brevity  as  the  subject' 
would  admit,   Rome's   three  great  engines  for  promoting  ca- 
tholick ignorance,  and  preventing  every  acquisition   in   know- 
ledge which  might  prove  subversive  of  her  high  pretensions  ; 
first,  the  concealment  of  scripture   from  the  people,  and  even 
of  the  impoi't  of  the  forms  of  publick  worship,  by  the  daily  use  ' 
of  a  dead  language  ;  secondly,  the  prohibition,  under  the  sei" 
verest  penalties,  of  every  thing  which  might  serve  to  enlightetf* 
and  undeceive  the  world  ;  and  thirdly,  their  system  of'  perse-^ 
cution.     The  first  two  were  chiefly  calculated  for  preventing^^ 
all  intercourse  with  that  most  formidable  enemy  of  supersti-' 
tion,  knowledge  ;  the  third   intended  principally  for  checking" 
its  progress  wherever   it  appears  to  have  made  any  advances  ;, 
and  that  both  by  silencing  all  who  had   ventured  to   listen  t6" 
her  dictates  ;  and,  by  deterring  others  from  the'  imitation  of^ 
those  over-curious  inquirers,  who  are  not  satisfied  to  see  witHf' 

*  See  the  preface  to  that  work. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  3.7§ 

othe.r  men's  eyes,  and  hear  with  other  men's  ears,  but  would 
have  more  light  and  information  on  the  most  interesting  of  all 
subjects,  than  their  ghostly  fathers  think  their  organs  capable 
of  bearing. 

The  second  expedient,  however,  is  of  a  later  date  than  the 
other  two  ;  for,  though  there  were  prohibitions  of  books  some 
centuries  before  the  reformation,  they  were  very  general,  and 
related  only  to  the  books  of  those,  who  had  been  by  the  church 
declared  hereticks.  It  was  not  till  after  the  invention  of  print- 
ing, nay,  and  after  the  reformation,  that  the  indices  expiirgatorii 
were  devised.  These  have  improved  this  engine,  by  giving  it 
all  the  perfection  whereof  it  is  susceptible.  If  they  had  timely 
thought  of  smothering  the  art  of  printing  in  its  infancy,  which 
was  about  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  century,  I  believe  this 
preventive  device,  as  it  was  simpler,  would  have  been  more 
easily  executed,  and  more  effectual,  than  that  corrective  expe- 
dient of  the  indeXy  which  was  adopted  afterwards.  Simpler^ 
because  preventive,  doing  the  business  at  once  ;  whereas,  the 
corrective  method  stands  incessantly  in  need  of  additions 
made  to  it,  on  account  of  the  many  volumes  which  are  annu- 
ally, in  all  parts  of  Europe,  issuing  from  the  press  ;  and  which, 
from  the  easy  intercourse  that  now  obtains  between  different, 
and  even  distant,  nations,  are  quickly  circulated  through  the 
whole.  It  might  also  have  been  more  easily  executed  j  for, 
though  there  were  many  of  those  called  hereticks  then  scatter- 
ed through  the  world,  they  were  not  persons  of  any  rank  or 
influence,  nor  was  there,  at  that  time,  any  nation  in  the  westj 
which  had  separated  from  Rome.  And  though,  as  was  before 
observed  to  you,  every  state  had  not  admitted  the  inquisition, 
the  paramount  authority  of  Rome,  in  spirituals,  was  acknow- 
ledged, and  in  matters  that-  seemed  to  regard  solely  the  purity 
of  the  faith,  very  implicitly  submitted  to  by  all. 

Nay,  the  ignorance  and  most  absurd  prejudices  of  the  age 
might  have  been  of  great  service  to  the  ecclesiasticks  in  secu- 
ring success  to  the  preventive  remedy,  if  it  had  but  occurred, 
to  their  reverences,  and  been  attempted  in  time.  There  was 
then  not  only  a  strong,  and,  I  may  say,  an  universal  belief  in 
sorcery,  and  judicial  astrology,  but  the  first  specimens  that 
were  exhibited  of  the  typographical  art  were,  in  fact,  strongly 
suspected  to  be  derived  from  the  suggestion  of  evil  spirits. 
And  this  itself  proved  the  foundation  of  a  great  deal  of  trou- 
ble and  persecution  to  John  Faust,  the  inventor,  (whom  some 
of  you  perhaps  will  know  better  by  the  name  of  Doctor  Faus- 
tus.)  Nor  did  his  acquittal  by  the  parliament  of  Paris,  when 
prosecuted  before  them  for  magick,  remove  the  suspicions, 
wliich  the  people  had  entertained  concerning  him  ;  insomuch, 


$7&  LECTURES  ON 

that  there  was  no  defect  of  combustible  materials  for  the  eccle- 
siastick  thunders  to  set  on  fire,  if  the  matter  had  been  timely 
attended  to.  But  Mentz,  the  city  where  printing  was  first 
attempted,  lay  luckily  at  a  great  distance  from  Rome  ;  in  con- 
sequence of  which,  this  admirable  invention  had  advanced 
too  far,  was  grown  too  considerable,  and  had  gotten  too  many 
rich,  and  great,  and  learned  patrons,  to  support  it,  before  ail 
alarm  of  sufficient  force  to  destroy  it  could  be  given;  vrhere- 
as,  had  the  attempt  at  printing  been  first  made  in  the  heart  o^ 
Italy,  where  that  terrible  Argus,  the  pope  and  conclave,  is  ever 
on  the  watch,  or  in  Spain,  or  Portugal,  under  the  eye  of  a 
vigilant  and  able  inquisitor,  capable  of  foreseeing  the  conse- 
quences to  the  empire  of  ignorance  and  superstition,  there  is 
reason  to  believe,  that  the  inventor,  though  in  effect  a  greater 
benefactor  to  the  human  race,  than  all  the  conquerours  and 
heroes  that  ever  existed,  one  who  has  done  more  to  enlighten 
and  civilize  mankmd  than  even  the  wisest  legislators,  had,  in 
reward  of  his  ingenuity,  been  put  to  an  ignominious  and  tor- 
menting death,  his  name  branded  with  indelible  infamy,  and 
this  most  useful  and  beautiful  invention  had  been  stifled  in  the 
cradle,  and  never  more  heard  of.  If  this  had  been  accom- 
plished, no  body  can  doubt,  that  it  would  have  been  a  much 
more  effectual  method  than  the  index  for  answering  their  pur- 
pose ;  for  that  would  have  struck  at  the  root  of  the  evil, 
whereof  this  serves  only  to  lop  off  the  branches. 

But  it  pleased  providence  to  bless  with  success  the  noble 
discovery,  which  has  brought  learning,  formerly  inaccessible 
to  all  but  men  of  princely  fortunes,  within  the  reach  of  persons 
in  moderate  circumstances,  and  has  diffused,  almost  every 
where,  a  knowledge  which  has  proved  more  baneful  to  the 
cause  of  superstition  and  tyranny,  than  any  event  that  has  hap- 
pened since  the  first  promulgation  of  the  gospel.  Knowledge 
had,  indeed,  been  gaining  ground  for  some  centuries  before, 
but  its  progress  was  slow.  This  served  to  accelerate  its  pro- 
gress to  an  inconceivable  degree.  Light,  acquired  by  one, 
was  quickly  diflPused  every  where,  and  communicated  to  mul- 
titudes. Nor  was  it  only  by  a  wider  diffusion,  but  by  occa- 
sioning also  an  immense  increase  of  knowledge,  that  the  dis- 
covery of  the  typographick  art  proved  the  source  of  the 
changes,  which  were  soon  after  effected.  When,  by  the  re- 
markable facility  of  communication,  learning  was  brought 
within  the  reach  of  the  middle  ranks,  the  dead  languages 
became  a  very  general  study.  The  scriptures  were  read  by 
most  students  in  the  Latin  vulgate,  and,  by  a  few  deeper 
scholars,  in  the  Greek.  The  early  writers  of  the  church 
were  also  wad.      Reading  naturally  brought  reflection,   and 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  5r7 

«>ccasioned  comparison.  They  could  hardly  avoid  comparing 
the  simplicity,  and  poverty,  and  meanness,  in  respect  of  world- 
ly circumstances,  ot  our  Lord,  and  his  apostles,  and  most  of 
the  primitive  saints  and  martyrs,  with  the  pomp,  and  splen- 
dour, and  opulence,  of  the  rulers  of  the  church  in  their  own 
days.  It  is  said,  that  a  picture  which  Huss  had  procured,  and 
exhibited  to  the  people,  wherein  the  entry  of  our  Lord  into 
Jerusalem,  riding  on  an  ass,  attended  by  his  disciples  on  foot, 
in  a  very  homely  garb,  was  contrasted  by  a  procession  of  the 
pope  and  cardinals,  in  their  pontifical  habits,  and  magnificently 
mounted  on  the  finest  horses,  richly  caparisoned,  and  adorned 
with  gold  and  silver  and  jewels,  did  not  a  little  contribute  to 
excite  the  indignation  of  spectators  against  their  spiritual 
lords,  as  bearing  no  resemblance  to  those  meek,  humble,  and 
unassuming  men,  from  whom  they  pretended  to  derive  all 
their  high  powers  and  prerogatives. 

But  the  difference,  in  respect  of  wealth  and  worldly  grandeur 
between  the  predecessors  and  their  pretended  successours, 
would  not  have  had  a  great  effect,  had  this  been  the  only  dif- 
ference. It  was  but  too  evident,  that  the  disparity  was  not 
less  in  disposition  and  character  than  in  external  circum- 
stances. When  once  the  clergy  of  any  note  had  gotten  con- 
siderably above  the  middling  ranks  of  life,  and  lived  not  only 
in  ease,  but  in  opulence,  and  even  in  splendour,  it  was  but  too 
visible,  that,  in  proportion  as  they  became  more  rich  and 
powerful,  they  grew  less  active  and  useful.  They  lived  in 
luxury  and  idleness,  often  in  the  most  gross  and  scandalous 
vices.  As  to  what  were  properly  the  duties  of  their  charge, 
the  instruction  of  the  people,  and  presiding  in  the  publick  wor- 
ship, and  sacred  offices  among  them,  these  were  but  too  com- 
monly considered  as  a  sort  of  drudgery,  very  unsuitable  to 
men  of  their  dignity  and  figure,  and  were  therefore  either  to- 
tally neglected,  or  devolved  on  those  whose  poverty,  however 
ill  qualified  they  were,  might  induce  them,  for  a  living,  to  un- 
dertake the  task.  At  the  same  time,  whatever  could  be  con- 
sidered as  a  prerogative,  or  privilege  of  the  office,  whatever 
could  contribute  to  the  augmentation  of  their  riches,  or  of 
their  power,  was  contended  for  with  such  an  earnestness  and 
zeal,  as  the  apostles  and  primitive  martyrs  never  displayed, 
unless  in  support  of  the  faith  and  religious  institution  once  de- 
Ipered  by  their  master  unto  the  saints. 

Thus  every  thing  had  run  into  extremes  among  them.  The 
dignified  clergy,  as  they  were  both  wealthy  and  powerful,  were 
generally  lazy,  proud,  ambitious,  envious,  vindictive,  and 
sometimes  profligate.  Those  again,  on  whom  the  burden  of 
the  service  was  devolved,  as  they  were  both  needv  and  depend- 

B  bb 


378  LEjCTURES  ON 

ent,  and  often  ignorant,  had  a  share  of  the  vices,  which  com- 
monly accompany  those  circumstances.  They  were  false, 
mercenary,  and  servile.  How  much  men  were  confirmed  in  the 
very  worst  opinions,  which  had  been  formed  of  the  order,  by 
the  great  schism  in  the  papacy,  which  lasted  about  half  a  cen- 
tury, when  the  christian  world  was  divided  between  two,  at 
first,  and  afterwards  three,  rival  popes,  some  nations  adhering 
to  one,  and  others  to  another,  each  claiming  to  be  the  only 
true  head  of  the  church,  and  calling  every  other  an  usurper,  it 
would  be  superfluous  to  remark.  It  was  this  division  in  the 
popedom,  both  in  the  head,  and  in  the  members,  which,  as 
much  as  anything,  exposed,  in  the  strongest  light,  the  irreli- 
gion,  the  worldly  ends,  the  vile  intrigues,  and  even  the  inlamy, 
of  ecclesiastick  leaders.  I  would  not,  however,  be  understood, 
in  the  character  now  given,  as  meaning  to  include  all  without 
exception.  I  know  that,  even  in  the  worst  times,  there  were 
both  in  the  higher  and  in  the  lower  ranks  of  clergymen,  ex- 
ceptions of  persons,  whose  characters  "^  ere  irreproachable,  and 
lives  exemplary.  But  what  I  say  regards  the  generality,  or 
the  much  greater  number,  of  the  clerical  body.  And  for  the 
truth  of  it,  I  desire  no  other  vouchers,  than  their  own  most 
celebrated  historians  and  writers,  men  who  not  only  lived  and 
died  in  the  communion  of  Rome,  but  also  were  zealous  for 
preserving  her  unity,  and  advancing  her  honour.  It  will 
readily  be  admitted,  as  a  circumstance  of  additional  weighty 
that  the  different  kingdoms  and  states  of  Europe  had,  at 
length,  attained  a  better  defined  and  more  settled  constitution 
than  formerly  ;  that  statesmen  had  begun  to  entertain  more  ex- 
tensive views  of  policy,  and  princes  to  understand  better  their 
own  rights  and  interests.  As  men's  eyes  were  opened,  they 
saw  more  clearly  the  encroachments  and  usurpations  of  the 
priesthood.  This  discovery,  co-operating  with  the  abhorrence 
and  contempt  they  entertained  of  many  of  the  priests  them- 
selves on  personal  accounts,  namely,  the  neglect  or  prostitution 
of  the  sacred  functions,  and  the  dissoluteness  of  their  lives,  led 
them  to  inquire  a  little  into  the  foundations  of  the  high  powers 
and  privileges  which  they  claimed.  This  was  a  subject,  that 
would  not  bear  examination.  As  the  great  foundations  of  the 
hierarchy  were  in  the  people's  ignorance,  superstition,  and 
credulity,  when  these  are  removed,  the  whole  fabrick  falls  to 
pieces. 

Now  it  is  remarkable,  that  in  all  the  heresies  which  sprang 
up  in  the  different  parts  of  Europe,  since  the  revival  of  letters, 
church  power  seems  to  have  been  the  principal  object  struck 
at.  Whereas,  in  ancient  times,  it  v/as  only  incidentally  affect- 
ed.    This  will  appear  manifest  to  one  who  considers  t^  aC|< 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  379 

cusations  brought  against  Waldo,  of  Lyons,  or  at  least  his  fol- 
lowers, Wickliff  of  England,  Huss  of  Bohemia,  Lather  of 
Germany,  and  Zuinglius  of  Switzerland  ;  and  compares  them 
with  those  brought  against  the  heresiarchs  of  the  primitive 
ages,  such  as  Arius,  Pelagius,  Nestorius,  Eutychius,  in  none 
of  whom  was  there  any  direct  or  pointed  aim  against  ec- 
clesiasticks.  In  those  early  times,  indeed,  church  power, 
far  from  being  grown  up  to  such  an  enormous  picch  as  it 
arrived  at  afterwards,  was  but  in  its  nonage  ;  nor  were  church- 
men themselves  become  obnoxious  to  universal  odium,  by 
their  laziness  and  arrogance,  as  well  as  by  the  immorality 
of  their  lives.  This  difference  of  circumstances  gave  a  taint 
to  the  modern  sects,  which  plainly  distinguished  them  from 
the  ancient,  and  contributed  not  a  little  to  the  virulence, 
which  their  disputes  excited  in  their  adversaries.  The 
wounds  given  to  these  were  the  deeper,  and  the  more  apt 
to  fester,  inasmuch  as  they  awaked  in  their  breasts  a  con- 
sciousness, that  they  were  not  unmerited.  Those  antago- 
nists saw  but  too  clearly,  that  the  majority,  even  of  their 
friends,  who  would  not  admit  the  conclusions  drawn  by 
the  reformers^  (as  they  called  themselves,  or  hereticks,  as 
their  enemies  called  them)  agreed  but  too  much  with  them 
in  their  premises :  a  reflection  which  could  not  fail  to  gall 
them  exceedingly. 

The  usurpation  and  tyranny  of  ecclesiastical  superiours,  the 
ignorance  in  which  they  kept  the  people,  were  at  first  almost 
the  only  topicks.  From  this  they  proceeded  to  censure  prac- 
tical abuses  in  ceremonies  and  discipline.  The  third  and 
last  step  of  their  progress  was  to  expose  errours  in  doctrine. 
In  these,  indeed,  when  once  they  were  propounded  for  dis- 
cussion to  the  publick,  they  laid  the  principal  stress  of  their 
cause.  These  they  considered  as  the  source  of  every  thing 
else  that  was  amiss.  But  it  was  not  with  them  that  ihey 
began.  The  shameful  incontinence  and  debauchery  of  thd 
clergy  were  the  occasion,  that  very  early  and  verv  generally 
the  canons,  which  enjoin  celibacy,  became  the  subject  of  of- 
fence and  clamour.  The  absurdity  of  reading  the  scriptures 
to  the  people,  and  performing  the  publick  offices  of  religion  in 
a  language  which  they  do  not  understand,  it  required  but  a 
small  share  of  knowledge,  or  rather  of  reflection  and  com  non 
sense,  to  enable  them  to  discover.  The  manifest  inconsistency 
of  the  practice,  which  had  been  introduced,  had  grisdaatly 
spread,  and  was  at  last  become  universal,  of  administrating  the 
eucharist  to  the  people  in  o*c  kind  only,  the  bread,  (the  iu- 
consistency  of  this   I   say)  with  the   express   words    of  tlie 


380  LECTURES  ON 

institution,  recorded  in  no  fewer  than  four  books  of  scripture; 
the  exorbitant  power  and  immunities,  which,  through  the  cri- 
minal, as  well  as  weak,  indulgence  of  the  secular  powers, 
clergymen  had  obtained,  and  of  which  they  made  so  bad  a 
use,  afforded  matter  of  loud  and  universal  outcry. 

For  some  centuries  before  Luther's  days,  these,  and  the 
like  corruptions,  had  been  the  subj^t  of  complaint  and  mur- 
mur in  various  places.  But|frora  the  time  of  Wickliff 's  preach- 
ing in  England,  and  sending  abroad  his  sentiments  to  the 
world  in  Latin  tracts,  which  was  near  a  century  and  a  half 
before  the  reformation,  men's  attention  was  roused  to  such 
topicks,  and  people  grew  bolder  every  day  in  speaking  out 
their  opinions.  What  they  had  ventured  only  to  mutter,  as 
it  were,  in  a  whisper  before,  they  did  not  hesitate  to  proclaim 
in  the  most  publick  manner.  You  know  the  influence  which 
Wickliff's  doctrine  had,  even  in  the  remote  kingdom  of  Bohe- 
TOiia,  and  the  unhappy  fate  (I  mean  to  outward  apnearance)  of 
his  two  famous  disciples,  John  Huss  and  Jerom  of  Prague, 
I  do  not  say  that  in  all  things  they  adhered  to  the  opinions  of 
the  celebrated  English  doctor.  But  as  in  what  relates  to  the 
corruptions  of  the  church,  and  of  the  clergy,  the  exorbitance 
and  abuse  of  ecclesiastick  power,  they  were  evidently  his  fol- 
lowers ;  so  by  his  writings  and  example  they  were  embol- 
dened to  give  an  open  testimony  to  the  truth  in  their  native 
country,  and  to  seal  it  with  their  blood  in  Constance.  This, 
though  it  be  not  considered  as  the  era  of  the  reformation,  for 
it  happened  about  a  century  before  the  publick  remonstrances 
of  Luther,  is  justly  regarded  as  having  paved  the  way  for  it. 
Wickliff  had  left  a  seed  of  reformation  in  England,  which  it 
was  not  in  the  power  of  the  combined  rulers,  both  spiritual 
and  temporal,  to  destroy.  The  martyrdom  of  Huss  and  Jerom 
by  the  Romish  sanhedrim,  at  Constance,  confederated  with  the 
imperial  authority  basely  prostituted  in  violation  of  plighted 
faith,  through  the  accursed  casuistry  of  those  bloody  and 
deceitful  men,  proved,  as  in  primitive  times,  the  means  of 
promoting,  and  not  of  obstructing,  the  cause.  In  short,  men 
were  now  arrived  at  such  a  measure  of  knowledge,  as  ren- 
dered the  methods  employed  to  keep  their  minds  in  subjec- 
tion, formerly  so  successful,  perfectly  ridiculous.  The  clergy 
had  lost  that  veneration  and  respect  from  the  people,  which 
mere  external  trappings,  and  arrogant  pretensions,  had  once 
been  found  sufficient  to  secure  to  them.  Nay,  so  much  were 
the  sentiments  of  many  of  the  laity  changed  in  regard  to 
those  articles,  that  the  spiritual  denunciations  and  curses, 
(when  unaided  by  the  secular  arm)  which  would  have  made 
their  forefathers  tremble,  served  only  to  make  them  smile. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  S81 

Thus  stood  matters,  in  regard  to  religion,  throughout 
Europe,  about  the  end  of  the  fifteenth,  and  beginning  of  the 
sixteenth  century.  Nothing  could  be  more  evident  to  men  of 
discernment,  than  that  Christendom  was  ripe  for  a  revolution 
in  its  ecclesiastical  polity,  and  seemed  only  to  wait  for  a 
favourable  occasion.  Such  an  occasion,  the  avarice  of  pope 
Leo  the  tenth,  and  the  impiety,  as  well  as  indiscretion,  of  his 
ministers  and  agents,  soon  furnished.  The  use  that  was 
made  of  that  occasion,  and  the  effects  produced  by  it,  I  shall 
briefly  consider  in  my  next  lecture. 


382  LECTURES  ON 


LECTURE  XXVIIL 


An  spite  of  all  the  endeavours,  so  assiduously  used  by  Rome, 
to  shut  out  the  light  of  the  understanding,  and  to  keep  men's 
minds  in  bondage,  in  spite  of  all  her  affected  mysteriousness 
in  religious  offices,  and  even  in  the  lessons  she  gives  publickly 
from  the  word  of  God,  by  employing  a  language  unknown  to 
the  vulgar,  in  spite  of  her  prohibitions  with  regard  to  books, 
and  her  inquisitions  into  heresy,  it  was  impossible  for  her  so 
to  exclude  the  dawn  of  truth,  now  rising  on  the  world,  after 
a  long  and  dreary  night  of  superstition  and  ignorance,  as  to 
prevent  the  discovery  both  of  the  weakness  of  her  empire, 
and  of  the  badness  of  the  foundation  on  which  it  stands. 
Men  were  become  at  length  pretty  generally  disposed  to  listen 
to  those,  who  declaimed  against  their  spiritual  guides,  whose 
faults  they  could  not  now  ai'oid  perceiving.  They  no  longer 
entertained  for  them  the  blind  veneration,  wherewith  they 
had  formerly  been  affected.  Nay,  they  seemed  to  be  running 
fast  into  the  opposite  extreme,  that  of  entertaining  for  their 
ecclesiastical  superiours  an  immoderate  aversion  and  con- 
tempt. The  pride,  the  avarice,  the  ambition,  the  laziness, 
and  the  sensuality  of  the  clergy  were  never-failing  topicks  of 
satire  every  where. 

If  things  had  not  been  in  this  train,  when  Luther  began  his 
publick  declamations  against  the  validity  of  indulgences,  and 
other  pov/ers,  which  Rome  had  usurped  over  the  christian 
people,  converting  their  ignorance  and  brutishness  into  useful 
engines  for  filling  her  coffers  ;  that  great  reformer  had  never 
been  so  successful  amongst  all  ranks  and  degrees  of  people, 
as  he  evidently  proved.  But  as  the  knowledge  and  personal 
experience  of  the  much  greater  part  of  his  hearers  perfectly 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  s§3 

confirmed  the  severest  of  his  censures,  he  found  no  difficulty 
in  fixing  their  attention,  and  in  exposing,  to  the  conviction  of 
ntiany,  the  total  want  of  support  from  scripture,  reason,  and 
antiquity,  of  the  arrogant  claims  to  dominion,  which  had  been 
raised  by  their  spiritual  guides.  It  is  indeed  manifest,  that 
when  Luther  first  assumed  the  character  of  reformer,  he  had 
no  intention,  nor  even  idea,  of  proceeding  so  far  as  he  after- 
wards found  himself  under  a  necessity  of  going.  He  first 
struck  only  at  the  abuse,  which  had  proved  the  immediate 
handle  of  examining  the  papal  prerogatives.  And  though 
from  the  beginning  he  did  not  ascribe  to  the  pope  that  omni- 
potence, which  has  not  very  decently  been  attributed  to  him 
by  the  canonists,  he  was,  on  the  other  hand,  far  from  disput- 
ing his  primacy,  or  even  his  supremacy,  in  any  sense  short  of 
absolute  despotism. 

It  has  often  been  objected  to  him,  and  his  followers,  under 
which  denomination  the  Romanists  are  wont  to  include  all 
protestants,  that  he  himself  appealed  to  the  pope  from  the 
judgment  of  his  antagonists,  that  he  declared  repeatedly,  that 
he  would  be  determined  by  his  judgment ;  and  yet,  when  his 
holiness  interposed,  and  gave  judgment  on  the  question  in 
debate,  he  did  not  depart,  in  the  smallest  circumstance,  from 
the  doctrine  he  had  maintained  in  direct  contradiction  to  that 
judgment.  The  truth,  I  believe,  is  :  when  Luther  declared 
his  submission  to  Rome,  he  spoke  sincerely,  though  unadvis- 
edly :  he  flattered  himself,  that  the  reasons  which  had  influ- 
enced his  opinion  were  exceedingly  plain,  and  could  not  fail 
to  influence  the  pontiff's,  when  examined  seriously.  I  do  not 
question,  that  he  was  then  willing  to  impute  the  scandals  and 
abuses  committed  in  preaching  the  indulgences,  more  to  the 
instruments  employed  than  to  the  employer ;  and  persuaded 
himself,  that  when  the  pope  should  be  informed  of  the  whole, 
he  could  not  avoid  being  ashamed  of  the  conduct  of  his 
agents,  and  would  justify  Luther,  so  far,  at  least,  as  either 
to  recal,  or  to  qualify,  the  powers  which  had  been  given 
in  relation  to  indulgences,  and  to  pronounce  no  censure 
on  the  principles,  which,  on  this  subject,  had  been  maintain- 
ed by  that  appellant.  Perhaps  he  even  thought  that,  through 
the  superintendency  of  providence,  (for  at  that  time  he  seems 
to  have  entertained  no  sentiments  hostile  to  the  monarchical 
form  of  church  government)  such  a  scandal  would  be  prevent- 
ed, as  the  publick  justification  of  a  doctrine  of  the  most  per- 
nicious tendency,  disseminated  by  many  of  the  monks  on  this 
occasion. 

But  whatever  was  his  opinion  in  regard  to  the  conduct  which. 
would  be  held  by  Rome,  certain  it  is,  that  he  was  egregiously 


384  LECTURES  ON 

disappointed.  His  doctrine  was  solemnly  anathematized  and 
condemned  by  the  pope  as  heretical ;  he  himself  was  com- 
manded, within  a  limited  time,  to  recant,  on  pain  of  incur- 
ring all  the  censures  and  pimishraents  denounced  against  ob- 
stinate hereticks.  Luther  then  but  too  plainly  perceived,  that 
he  had  not  sufficiently  known  himself,  when  he  professed  such 
implicit  submission  to  the  pope.  By  his  preaching  and  publi- 
cations he  had  involved  himself  in  controversy,  and  brought 
a  number  of  adversaries  upon  him.  This  set  him  upon  in- 
quiring into  the  foundations  of  the  received  doctrine,  and  ex-^ 
amining  the  fabrick  of  ecclesiastick  dominion  which  had  been 
erected.  Both  these  he  had,  before  that  time,  received  as 
subrnissiveiy  as  any  the  most  implicit  son  of  the  church.  Nei- 
ther of  them  could  bear  a  critical  examination.  Of  this,  the 
further  he  went,  he  had  the  fuller  evidence. 

It  was  not  easy  for  any  man,  especially  a  man  of  so  sanguine 
ii  temper,  and  of  so  great  acuteness,  to  confine  himself 
entirely  to  those  topicks,  which  gave  rise  to  the  debate.  We 
must  be  sensible,  it  would  have  been  the  more  difficult,  when 
the  humour  of  his  antagonists  is  duly  considered.  They  ar- 
gued from  principles  generally  received  at  the  time,  and 
which  he  thought  himself  under  a  necessity  either  to  admit  or 
to  deny.  This  led  him  to  inquire  into  those  principles,  and 
the  inquiry  often  terminated  in  a  detection,  as  he  thought,  of 
their  falsehood.  He  was  too  honest,  and  too  intrepid,  not  to 
avow  the  discovery,  and  this  always  engaged  him  in  a  new 
controversy.  The  scholastick  art  of  disputation  then  in  vogue, 
which  abounded  with  subtle,  but  unmeaning,  distinc- 
tions, might  have  given  him  considerable  assistance  in  eluding 
the  address  and  malice  of  his  enemies,  without  explicitly  de- 
claring himself  on  several  points,  which  they  had  very  artfully 
dragged  into  the  dispute.  That  this  should  be  their  method 
we  cannot  be  surprised.  The  more  articles  of  the  received 
doctrine  thev  could,  by  plausible  inference,  show  his  princi- 
ples to  be  subversive  of,  the  more  they  exposed  him  to  popu- 
lar odium,  and  embarrassed  him  for  a  reply.  The  success, 
however,  of  his  preaching,  and  of  his  writings,  was  so  far 
bevond  expectation,  that  he  was  not  discouraged  from  going 
as  far  into  every  question  as  his  adversaries  could  desire. 

Nav,  now  that  he  was  led  into  the  discussion,  now  that 
Rome  had  gone  all  the  lengths  which  his  enemies  could  de- 
sire, now  that  the  rupture  was  complete,  he  seemed  forward 
to  examine  every  thing  to  the  bottom.  He  was  no  longer  de- 
sirous of  keeping  any  measures  with  the  ecclesiastical  estab- 
lishment. The  whole  fabrick  appeared  ruinous.  No  sound- 
ness in  the  materials  of  which  it  had  been  raised.     Rotten- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  385 

ness  was  discernible  in  every  part.  In  spite  of  all  the  arts  of 
his  enemies,  who  to  argument  were  not  slow  in  employing 
more  formidable  weapons,  in  spite  of  the  power,  as  well  as 
number,  of  those  he  had  to  contend  with,  his  doctrine  spread 
and  gained  proselytes  every  day.  Among  these  were  some 
of  high  rank  and  consideration,  who  were  able  to  protect  him, 
and  did  protect  him,  against  all  the  dangers  with  which  he 
was  environed.  The  influence  of  his  doctrine  is  not  to  be 
judged  of  barely  by  the  converts  which  he  made.  The  con- 
version of  so  many  kingdoms  and  principalities  to  his  system, 
though  the  greatest,  was  not  the  only  effect  of  his  teaching.  It 
waked  men  thoroughly  out  of  that  profound  sleep,  in  which, 
the  understandings  of  the  far  greater  part  lay  buried,  and 
roused  a  spirit  of  inquiry,  that  has  not  been  without  effect  in 
countries  which  still  continue  Roman  catholick,  in  humaniz- 
ing the  spirit,  and  bringing  even  their  theologians  to  extenu- 
ate, by  refined  explanations,  not  dreamt  of  in  former  ages, 
the  absurdities  of  popery  itself. 

It  has  been  objected  to  protestants,  that  Luther  preserved 
no  uniformity,  or  even  consistency,  of  conduct,  with  regard 
to  Rome  :  that  he  professed  the  utmost  submission  to  what- 
ever sentence  she  should  pronounce,  before  it  was  pronounced, 
and  paid  no  regard  to  common  decency  afterwards  ;  allowed 
himself  to  be  so  much  transported  by  passion  and  resentment, 
as  to  give  vent  to  the  grossest  scurrilities  and  abuse  ;  nay, 
that  adopting  the  very  spirit  of  that  power  against  which  he 
declaimed,  he,  as  it  were,  erected  himself  into  a  counter- 
pope,  retaliated  upon  the  Roman  pontiff,  by  returning  excom- 
munication for  excommunication,  and  burning  the  pope's  bulls 
and  decretals,  in  return  for  the  burning  of  his  books. 

Rational  protestants  do  not  hesitate  to  acknowledge  both  the 
inconsistency  of  his  conduct,  and  the  violence  of  his  passion. 
Their  faith  standeth  not  in  the  wisdom  of  man,  but  in  the 
power  of  God.  It  pleased  God  to  make  men  the  instruments, 
of  effecting  the  wonderful  revolution,  which,  in  the  course  of 
his  providence,  was  to  be  produced.  And  doubtless,  those 
men  are  entitled  to  some  honour,  on  account  of  the  character 
which  they  bore,  and  the  virtues  which  they  displayed,  as  in- 
struments of  providence  for  promoting  our  good.  They  ser- 
ved as  monitors  from  God,  for  rousing  our  attention  to  the 
dangers  wherewith  we  were  surrounded,  for  bringing  us  to  as- 
sert the  rights  of  men,  and  of  christians,  of  using  the  reason 
which  God  hath  given  us,  in  judging  for  ourselves,  in  what 
concerns  our  highest  interest,  for  time  and  for  eternity.  But 
then,  we  say,  they  were  sent,  not  to  command  us  to  receive 
the  doctrine  of  eternal  life  implicitly  from  them,  but  to  cx- 

c  cc 


390  ^^    XU^TURES  ON 


cite  VIS  to  search  the  scriptures,  to  inquire  and  decide  for  our- 
selves. Their  interposiiion.,  in  offering  their  sentimenis  in 
contradiction  to  their  superiours,  could  be  defended  onl)  on 
t^ie  right  of  private  judgment,  and  on  this  fundamental  tenet, 
that  God,  having  given  us  his  written  word  ror  our  rule,  had 
seen  no  necessity  for  empowering  any  man,  or  number  of  mei^. 
to  serve  as  an  infallible  interprtter  of  his  will.  A  character, 
therefore,  which  they  had  declared  unnecessary,  and  wViich 
they  found  no  man  or  society  entitled  to  assuine,  they  could  not 
consistently  arrogate  to  themselves.  And  if  any  of  thtm  pre^ 
Bumed  to  do  so,  or  acted  in  such  a  manner  as  implied  this  pre*-, 
sumption,  they  were  entitled  to  no  regard  from  their  hearers. 
Protestants,  so  far  from  asserting  the  infallibility  of  the  refor- 
mers, do  not  affirm  that  they  were  inspired.  They  were  ad- 
mpnishers,  not  dictators.  If  even  of  the  apostles,  v/ho  were 
endowed  with  the  miraculous  gifts  of  the  spirit,  and  often  both 
spoke  and  wrote  by  inspiration,  much  naore  of  the  reformers,^ 
concerning  whom  the  same  things  cannot  be  affirmed,  we  ought 
t|d  be  followers  no  further  than  they  were  of  Christ.  They 
^poke  as  to  wise  men — it  belonged  to  the  hearers  to  judge 
what  they  said. 

It  is  admitted  also  as  undeniable,  that  the  reformers,  who. 
arose  about  the  same  time  in  diff'erent  places,  differed  on  several 
articles  in  the  doctrine  which  they  taught.  This  was  particii^' 
larly  the  case  of  Luther  and  Zuinglius,  the  two  earliest.  As 
Jong  as  they  confined  themselves  to  the  abuses  which  had,  frona 
worldl'.,  motives,  been  introduced  into  the  church,  there  was  a 
wonderful  harmony  among  them  all.  The  sale  of  indulgences, 
t^e  celibacy  of  the  clergy  enforced  by  canon,  the  withholding 
of  the  eucharistical  cup  from  the  people,  the  religious  service 
in  an  unknown  tongue,  the  worship  paid  to  images  and  relicks, 
the  invocation  of  saints  and  angels,  the  clerical  usurpations  o^ 
secular  power,  the  rendering  of  church  censures  subservient 
to  the  avarice  and  ambition  of  ecclesiasticks,  were  practical 
corruptions  in  worship  and  discipline,  wherein  all  the  refornj- 
ers  were  agreed.  In  these  points,  and  several  others  such  af^ 
these,  a  majority  of  the  people  would,  I  am  persuaded,  ia 
most  christian  countries,  have  been  found  to  concur. 

We  ought  to  consider  it  as  a  vcrv  strong  proof  of  this,  thaj 
some  of  those  articles  had  afforded  matter  of  geiieral  com- 
plaint for  a  long  time  before.  Thus  the  permitting  of  thq 
clergy  to  marr\ ,  the  allowing  of  the  c\ip  to  the  people,  th^ 
perlbrming  of  the  religious  offues  in  the  lariguage  of  the 
country,  had  afforded  matter  of  application  to  popes  and  coun.- 
cils  for  more  than  a  century  back.  In  regard  to  the  corrupt 
use  so  flagrantly  made, of,  excoiiimunications  and  indulgences, 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  S8Y 

the  scandal  was  in  a  manner  universal ;  nor  was  there  a  couri- 
try,  province,  or  city  of  note,  where  there  were  not  frequeiit 
murmurs  against  the  exorbitant  power  and  Wealth,  aqd  the 
fconsequent  laziness  and  arrogance,  of  churchmen.  And  it 
their  idolatries  and  superstitious  usages  did  hot  excite  the  like 
general  offence,  it  is  more  to  be  ascribed  to  this  consideration. 
that  the  knowledge  of  the  scriptures  had  hardly  yet  descended 
to  the  lower  ranks.  But  we  may  rest  assured  of  it,  that  the 
increase  of  this  knowledge,  and  the  decrease  of  superstition 
And  idolatry,  must  have  accompanied  each  other. 

When  a  man  enters  keenly  into  controversy  on  any  subject, 
it  is  impossible  to  say  (unless  he  is  uncommonly  circumspect) 
how  far  it  may  carry  him.  It  generally  leads  to  the  discussion 
of  questions  little  connected  with  that  which  began  the  dis- 
pute. In  ihis  warfare,  a  man  is  so  much  at  the  mercy  of  his 
afitagoaist,  that  if  he  enter  into  it  with  more  warmth  than  cir- 
cumspection, he  will  follow  his  eneniy  that  he  may  fight  him, 
Wheresoever  he  shall  shelter  himself;  and  in  this  way,  botH 
Combatants  come  to  be  soon  off  the  ground  on  which  the  com- 
Sat  began.  Exactlv  such  a  disputant  was  Luther.  And  thi^ 
jiiay  be  said,  in  a  great  measure,  of  all  who  had  a  leading  hand 
Hi  the  reformation.  To  conquer  the  foe,  wherever  he  was, 
tarfie,  ere  the}'^  were  aware,  to  be  more  an  object  to  them,  thari 
to  drive  him  off  the  field,  and  keep  possession  of  it.  In  con- 
sequence of  this  tendency,  they  were  often  diverted  froni  the 
subject.  From  plain  and  practical  questions,  both  parties  soon 
turned  aside  into  the  dark  recesses  of  metaphysicks,  where 
£hey  quickly  bewildered  themselves  in  a  labyrinth  of  words. 
Siich  v^as  the  unhappy  consequence  of  their  dogmatizing  on 
abstruse,  not  to  say  unintelligible,  points  of  scholastick  theolo- 
^v,  wherein  it  might  often  admit  a  doubt,  whether  the  same 
tning  was  theant  by  them  under  different  expressions,  or  dif- 
ferent things  under  the  same  expression  ;  nay,  sometime^ 
\v|hether  either  party  had  any  meaning  at  all  to  what  he  said. 
Though  the  reformers,  and  Luther  in  particular,  were  far 
from  being  deficient  in  the  powers  of  reasoning,  they  were 
tnen  of  strong  passions,  and  great  ardour  of  spirit.  This  ren- 
dered them  liable  to  be  drawn  off  from  the  subject ;  and,  when 
neated  with  contradiction,  to  go  such  lengths  as  cool  reflection 
could  hot  justify.  V/e  ought  to  remember  too,  that,  being 
6'cclesiasticks,  some  of  them  regulars,  they  had  been  inured 
to  all  the  scholastick  quibbles  and  chicanery  in  vogue  at  the 
time,  and  from  which  it  was  impossible,  that,  without  a  mira- 
cle, they  should  entirely  emancipate  themselves.  We  ought, 
susb,  to  make  allowances  for  some  theological  opinions,  with 


388  LECTURES  ON 

which  their  minds  had  been  stronglj^  prepossessed,  Icng  before 
they  thought  of  a  breach  with  Rome. 

Of  this  sort  of  rooted  prejudices  was  the  doctrine  of  the 
real  presence^  as  it  was  called  with  the  reformer  Luther. 
This,  on  the  one  hand,  seems  with  him  to  have  been  a  favou- 
rite principle,  at  the  same  time  that,  on  the  other,  the  hatred 
he  had  contracted  to  Rome,  made  him  that  he  could  not  bear 
to  think  of  agreeing  with  her  almost  in  any  thing.  Therefore, 
though  he  would  have  a  real  presence  of  Christ  in  the  eucha- 
rist,  it  must  not  be  the  popish  real  presence.  His  mgenuity 
soon  devised  another.  Accordingly,  transuhstantiation  was 
rejected,  and  consubstantiation  adopted  in  its  stead.  That  is, 
the  bread  and  wine  were  not  transubstantiated,  or  changed 
into  the  substance  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  but  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ  were  consubstantiated,  that  is,  ac- 
tually present  in,  with,  and  under,  the  elements  of  bread  and 
wine,  and  were  therefore  literally  eaten  and  drunk  by  the  com-s 
municants.  In  no  part  of  Luther's  conduct  does  he  appear 
so  extravagant  as  in  this  absurd  conceit,  as  to  which  1  agree 
with  the  bishop  of  Meaux,  that  it  has  all  the  disadvantages 
which  the  Romanists,  and  the  Sacramentarians,  charge  on  one 
another,  without  having  a  single  advantage  that  can  be  claimed 
by  either.  It  has  all  the  absurdity  which  the  latter  charge  upon 
the  former,  inasmuch  as  it  represents  the  same  body  existing 
in  different  places  at  the  same  time,  and  inasmuch  as  it  repre- 
sents a  substance  existing  without  its  accidents,  or  under  the 
accidents  of  another  substance,  but  has  not  the  advantage  of 
simplicity  which  the  Romish  doctrine  has,  in  interpreting  lite- 
rally the  words.  This  is  my  body.  The  expression  on  the 
Lutheran  hypothesis,  ought  to  have  been,  not  This  is  my  body^ 
but  /n,  w/fA,  and  under ^  this  is  my  body.  For  they  maintain, 
that  the  bread  remains  unchanged,  and  is  that  which  is  seen, 
touched,  and  tasted  ;  but  that  the  body  of  Christ,  the  same 
which  he  had  upon  the  earth,  and  has  now  in  heaven,  accompa- 
nies the  bread.  It  has  all  the  obscurity  which  the  Romanists 
charge  upon  the  Sacramentarians,  na}^,  a  great  deal  more,  in- 
asmuch as  the  words  are  to  be  understood  neither  according 
to  the  letter,  nor  according  to  any  figure  of  speech  ever  heard 
of  before.  For,  by  their  account,  it  is  neither  literally  Christ's 
body,  nor  figuratively  the  sign  or  symbol  of  his  body;  but  it 
is  something  with  which  his  body  is  accompanied.  Indeed, 
this  novel  hypothesis  is,  in  everj^  vieAv,  so  extravagant,  that  it . 
is  impossible  to  conceive  whence  it  could  have  originated,  but  v 
from  the  collision  (if  I  may  so  express  mvself)  of  a  strong 
prejudice  in  favour  of  the  real  presence^  and  a  violent  inclination 
to  dissent  from  Rome,  as  much  as  possible,  on  every  subject. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  389 

The  controversies  in  which  this  novelty  of  consubstantiation 
involved  him,  not  onl)  with  the  papists,  but  with  the  Zuingli- 
ans,  and  other  reformers,  drew  him  at  last  to  take  refuge  in  a 
doctrine,  if  possible,  still  niore  extraordinary,  the  ubiquity^ 
that  is,  the  omnipresence,  and  consequently,  the  immensity, 
of  the  body  and  human  nature  of  Christ :  hence  they  were 
called  ubiquitarians.  This  monstrous  hypothesis  was  ima- 
gined to  remove  all  difficulties  ;  as  though  a  less  absurdity  (if 
there  be  degrees  in  absurdities^  could  be  removed  by  substi- 
tuting a  greater  in  its  place.  But  if  this  did  in  fact  solve  the 
difficulty,  in  regard  to  the  presence  of  Christ  in  the  eucharistj 
it  solved  it  by  annihilating  the  sacrament.  For  what,  I  pray, 
on  that  hypothesis,  were  the  sacramental  elements  ?  They  will 
not  call  them  signs,  or  figures,  for  that  suits  only  the  language 
of  those  whom  they  denominated  sacramentarians.  They 
could  not,  with  the  church  of  Rome,  call  them  the  identical 
body  and  blood  of  Christ ;  for  they  do  not  think  the  elements 
changed  or  transubstantiated.  They  remain  as  they  were. 
And  if  they  should  call  them  barely  accompaniments  of  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ,  wherein  do  they  raise  them  abo\'e 
any  other  kind  of  food  ;  for  according  to  the  ubiquitarian 
doctrine,  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  being  every  where,  may 
be  justly  said  to  be  /n,  with^  and  under ^  every  morsel  we  eat,^ 
and  every  drop  of  liquor  we  drink,  and  every  breath  we  draw. 
Instead  of  raising  the  sacrament,  therefore,  by  this  extrava- 
gant conception,  they  destroy  the  distinction  between  it  and 
every  ordinary  meal.  Nothing  more  common,  when  one  at- 
tempts to  explain  what  is  inexplicable,  and  to  defend  what  is 
absurd,  than  to  multiply  absurdities,  as  one  advances,  and  to 
give  one's  self  every  moment  more  nonsense  to  explain,  and 
more  to  defend. 

Let  it  not  be  imagined,  that  by  these  free  remarks  on  that  first 
and  most  eminent  reformer,  I  mean  either  to  lessen  his  cha- 
racter, or  to  depreciate  his  work.  Few,  on  the  contrary,  have 
a  greater  veneration  for  the  one,  or  set  a  higher  value  on  the 
other.  Luther  had  certainly  great  qualities  and  virtues  :  he 
had  also  great  faults  ;  but  the  former  much  preponderated. 
His  penetration  and  abilities  were  considerable.  I  mean  his 
knowledge,  his  eloquence,  his  skill  in  disputation,  and  his 
readiness  in  finding  resources,  even  in  the  greatest  difficulties. 
But  these  are  only  intellectual  talents  j  he  was  largely  supplied 
with  those  active  virtues,  which  are  necessary  for  putting  the 
afore-named  qualities  to  the  best  account.  An  unconquerable 
zeal  for  what  he  believed  to  be  truth,  constancy-  in  maintain- 
ing it,  intrepidity  in  facing  danger,  an  indefatiga'ile  industry 
in  employing  every  opportunity  that  offered  for  exposing  er- 
rour  and  superstition,  and  defending  what  he  thought  the  un- 


396  LECTURES  ON 

adulterated  religion  of  Jesus  Christ.  But  his  virtties  \*^er^ 
riot  without  defects.  Nay,  his  great  qualities  themselves  Wer| 
ftot  untainted  with  those  vices,  to  which  they  are  thought  t6 
&ear  an  affinity.  His  logical  acuteness  sornetimes  degenerated 
ihto  chicane.  But  this  was  the  fault  of  the  age  he  lived  ift^ 
and  of  his  education.  His  zeal,  and  the  warmth  of  his  teitt- 
per,  often  betrayed  him  into  an  unjustifiable  violence.  Hi^ 
magnanimity  was  not  untinctured  with  pride  alid  resentment. 
His  transports  of  rage,  arid  even  his  buffooneries,  against  the 
piDpe,  did  unspeakable  injury  to  his  cause  with  the  wiser  and 
more  intelligent  part  of  mankind  ;  even  with  those  who  desill-i 
ed  nothing  more  ardently  than  a  reformation  from  the  corrup- 
tions which  prevailed,  and  a  defence  of  christian  liberty  against 
the  too  well  established  tyranny  of  ecclesiastical  superiourS; 
His  perseverance  would,  perhaps,  on  some  6ccasions,  be  mo^^ 
properly  termed  obstinacy.  When  he  had  once  publickl\>' 
supported  si  tenet,  he  seemed  incapable  of  lending  an  impartial 
car  to  any  thing  advanced  in  opposition  to  it.  In  short,  What  Hi 
did,  and  what  he  was,  notwithstanding  his  errours,  justly 
merit  our  admiration,  Especially  when  we  consider  the  tinieii 
in  which,  and  the  people  amongst,  whom  he  lived  ;  t  rti^f 
add,  the  kind  of  education  he  had  obtained. 

No  true  protestant  considers  him,  or  any  of  the  refofmer^, 
as  either  apostle  or  evangelist.  It  is  a  fundamental  principli^ 
with  such,  to  call  no  man  upon  the  earth  master^  knoU'ing  thaflt 
we  have  one  master,  one  only  infallible  teacher,  in  heaverfi 
\^ho  is  Christ.  All  human  teachers  are  no  further  to  be  rc^ 
garded,  than  they  appear,  to  the  best  of  our  judgment,  on  inii 
partial  examination,  to  be  his  interpreters,  and  to  speak  hig 
words.  The  right  of  private  judgment,  in  opposition  to  all 
human  claims  to  a  dictatorial  authority,  in  matters  of  faith,  H 
a  point  so  essential  to  protestantism,  that  were  it  to  be  gjiveii 
up,  there  would  be  no  possibility  of  eluding  the  Worst  i*^- 
proaches,  with  which  the  Romanist  charges  the  reformation  ; 
namely,  schism,  sedition,  heresy,  rebellion,  and  I  know  noi 
•What.  But  if  our  Lord,  the  great  author  and  finisher  of  thid 
faith,  had  ever  meant  that  we  should  receive  implir itly  its  ar- 
ticles from  any  human  authority,  he  would  never  have  so  E^ 
pressly  prohibited  our  calling  any  man  upon  the  earth  mast'irf^ 
«»S-sjysj7?}5,  leader,  or  guide.  ^    _:^ 

A  general  dissatisfaction  prevailed  a^t  the  liVrie.  ^  univi^f* 
sal  acknowledgment,  things  w^re  not  as'  they  ought  to  be. 
Abuses  and  corruptions  were  on  every  hand  complained  of!, 
and  a  cry  for  reformation  was  every  where  raised.  Such  meil 
as  Luther,  at  such  a  time,  were  well  entitled  to  a  fair  and  pa- 
tient hearing.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  hearers  were  alsti' 
entitled  to  put  this  honour  upon  themselves ;  namely,  to  rd- 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY.  ^ 

celyp  what  was  spoken  both  by  them,  and  by  their  ^tagonists, 
as  spoken  to  wise  men,  to  weigh  and  judge  what  was  said. 
We  are  doubtless  now,  when  the  ferment  of  disputation  is 
over,  in  a  better  situation  for  judging  coolly  and  equitably  of 
the  merits  of  those  extraordinary  preachers,  than  the  people 
who  lived  in  that  age.  And  upon  the  most  deliberate  exami- 
nation, I  believe  the  unprejudiced  will  admit,  that,  with  all 
their  imperfections,  they  did  unspeakable  service  to  the  in^sjv 
rests  of  knowledge,  of  Christianity,  and  of  human  liberty. 

Having  said  so  much  of  their  talents  and  virtues,  I  shall, 
With  all  the  deference  due  lo  the  judgment  of  my  hearers, 
coffer  a  few  things  in  regard  to  their  defects  and  blemishes, 
particularly  considered  as  teachers.  The  first  I  shall  observe 
is  an  unavoidable  consequence  of  the  education  they  had  re- 
ceived, and  the  habits  to  which  they  were  inured ;  a  sort  of 
metaphysical  reasoning,  or  rather  sophistry,  the  genuine 
spawn  of  the  scholastick  logick,  which  had  for  ages  been  ii^ 
vogue,  and  which,  in  some  measure,  tainted  all  their  disputes. 
This  led  them  to  dogmatize  on  every  point,  and  was  that 
which  first  produced  dissension  among  themselves.  As  long 
a^  they  confined  their  declamation  to  church  tyranny,  to  the, 
correction  of  superstitious  and  idolatrous  practices,  to  those 
clerical  artifices  for  enhancing  power  and  wealth,  which  were, 
subversive  of  sound  morality,  they  concurred  harmoruousiy 
ip  every  thing ;  hut  no  sooner  did  they  enter  on  the  endles^ 
aifnd  unprofitable  discussion  of  a.bstruse  and  unedifying  ques-. 
tions,  of  which  holy  writ  has  either  said  nothing,  or  given  no 
decision,  than  their  harmony  was  at  an  end.  They  subdivided 
immediately.  They  alarmed  those  who  were  inclined  to  think 
favourably  of  their  ca,use.  They  made  many  retrez^t  who  hajd 
ijaade  advances.  They  supplied  their  enemies  with  arms 
against  them.,  and  made  enemies  of  friends  ;  inasmuch  a^  ma- 
ny became  enemies  one  to  another.  I'hen  arose  the  distinc- 
tions of  Lutheran,  and  Zuinglian,  and  Calvinist,  and  Sacra^ 
i][ientarian,  and  Ubiquitarian :  the  first  three  as  implying  not 
barely  the  disciples  of  such  particular  teachers,  but  as  the  par- 
tisans of  different  systems.  J^y  this  conduct,  a,lso,  they  fur- 
n^ished  an  argument  to  the  common  enemy,  to  which  I  do  not 
hpd  that  any  sect  has  yet  given  a  satisfactory  reply.  "  If  these. 
"  nice  and  abstract  questions,"  said  the  Romanist,  "about  which. 
"  you  make  so  great  a  bustle,  are  really  so  essential  to  salva- 
"  tion,  as  you  pretend,  it  is  impossible  that  the  scriptures  can 
"•be  so  perspicuous  as  you  account  them,  else  you  would  ne- 
"  ver,  after  a  careful  examination,  entertain  sentiments  so 
"  opposite  in  regard  to  those  questions."    What  made  the  im- 


3aa  LECTURES  ON 

not  treat  those  differences  in  opinion  as  matters  of  small  mb4 
ttieiit,  as  curious  speculations  with  which  the  pious  and  con- 
templative might  amuse  themselves,  but  on  which^  without 
affecting  their  christian  character,  persons  might  think  differ- 
entl)--  Far  otherwise  ;  they  treated  them  as  equally  funda- 
mental with  those  which  they  itiade  the  subject  of  their  decla- 
mations against  the  corimon  foe  ;  and  were  often  transported 
with  equal  fury  against  one  another,  on  account  of  those  dif- 
ferences, as  they  were  against  him.  "  You  all  appeal"  (said 
Erasmus,  whom  they  wanted  to  gain,  and  who  at  first  appear- 
ed favourable,  being  as  much  an  enemy  to  superstition  and 
eccle^iastick  tyranny  as  any  of  them,  you  all  appeal,  said  he) 
*'^  to  the  pure  word  of  God,  whereof  you  think  yourselves  true 
"  interpreters.  Agree  then  amongst  yourselves  about  its 
*'  meaning,  before  you  pretend  to  give  law  to  the  world." 
"  It  is  of  importance,"  said  Calvin,  in  a  letter  to  his  friend 
Melancthon,  "  that  no  suspicion  of  the  divisions  which  are 
^*  amongst  us  descend  to  future  ages  ;  for  it  is  ridiculous  be- 
"  yond  imagination,  that,  after  having  broken  with  all  the 
"  world,  we  should,  from  the  beginning  of  our  reformation, 
"  agree  so  ill  amongst  ourselves."  Indeed,  this  bad  agree- 
mem.,  as  it  was  a  great  stumbling-block  in  the  way  of  those, 
who  inclined  to  examine  the  matter  to  the  bottom,  so  it  prov- 
ed a  greater  check  to  the  cause  of  the  reformers,  than  any 
which  the  open  or  the  secret  assaults  of  their  enemies  had 
yet,  either  by  spiritual  weapons,  or  by  carnal,  been  able  to 
give  it. 

But  unfortunately,  (for  the  truth  ought,  without  respect  of 
persons,  to  be  spoken)  they  had  not  sufficiently  purged  their 
own  minds  from  the  old  leaven  ;  they  still  retained  too  much 
of  the  spirit  of  that  corrupt  church  which  they  had  left.  As 
they  were  men,  we  ought  to  form  a  judgment  of  them  not  on- 
ly with  candour,  but  with  all  the  lenity  to  which  their  educa- 
tion, the  circumstances  of  the  times,  the  difficulties  they  had 
to  surmount,  and  the  adversaries,  they  had  to  encounter,  so 
justly  entitle  them.  But  as  they  were  teachers  of  religion, 
we  ought  to  be  at  least  as  careful  not  to  allow  an  excessive  ve- 
neration for  their  great  and  good  qualities,  to  mislead  us  into 
a  respect  for  their  errours,  or  to  adopt  implicitly  the  system 
of  any  one  of  thexn  ;  that  we  must  learn  not  to  think  of  men 
above  that  which  is  written,  that  no  one  of  us  be  puffed  up  for 
one  against  another.  The  spirit  of  the  church,  especiall)  that 
nourished  in  the  cloisters,  was  a  spirit  of  wrangling  and  al- 
tercation. Never  could  any  thing  better  suit  the  unimportant 
and  undeterminable  questions  there  canvassed  by  the  recluses, 
than  the  words  of  the  apostle,  vain  Janglings  and  oppositions 


ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY*  m^ 

^f  science  falsely  s&  called.  As  therefore  they  had  not  avoid* 
ted  these,  nor  taken  the  apostolical  warning  not  to  dote  about 
^questions  and  strifes  of  words,  they  soon  experienced  in  them- 
selves, and  in  their  followers,  the  truth  of  the  apostolical  pre- 
diction, that  envy,  contention,  railings,  evil  surmisings,  and 
perverse  disputings,  would  come  of  them  ;  but  that  they  would 
never  minister  to  the  edifying  of  themselves  in  love  ;  that  so 
far  would  their  disputations  be  from  answering  the  end,  and 
terminating  their  differences,  that  they  would  incessantly  give 
birth  to  new  questions,  and  would  increase  unto  mor€  ungodli- 
ness. This  contentious  spirit,  derived  from  the  schoolmen, 
and  commonly  accompanied  with  spiritual  pride,  and  a  vitiat- 
ed understanding,  did  not  fail  of  producing  its  usMal  conse-^ 
quences,  uncharitableness  in  judging  of  others,  on  account 
of  difference  of  opinion,  and  intolerance  in  the  manner  of 
treating  them.  Of  the  first  of  these^  the  evidences  are  c6e- 
Val  with  the  questions,  and  perfectly  unequivocal  j  and  of  the 
last,  that  is,  of  the  intolerant  spirit  they  had  retained  of  the 
church  they  had  deserted,  it  must  not  be  dissembled,  that 
they  gave  but  too  manifest  jproofs  as  soon  as  they  had  power. 

You  will  do  me  the  justice  to  believe  me,  when  I  add,  that 
it  proceeds  not  from  any  pleasure  in  depreciating,  that  I  have 
taken  so  much  of  the  invidious  task  of  exposing  the  blemishes 
m  those  truly  meritorious  characters.  But  of  men  so  much  ex* 
posed  to  publick  view,  and  so  highly  distinguishable,  as  were 
our  reformers  from  popery,  there  is  a  considerable  danger  on 
either  side  in  forming  a  wrong  judgment.  One  is,  indeed, 
that  a  prejudice  against  the  instruments  may  endanger  out 
contracting  a  prejudice  against  the  cause.  Of  this  exttettte, 
in  this  protestant  country^  I  imagine,  we  are  in  little  danger. 
To  prevent  it,  however,  their  faults  ought  not  to  be  mention- 
ed without  doing  justice  to  their  virtues.  The  other  is,  lest 
a  prepossession  in  favour  of  the  cause  prove  the  source  of  a 
blind  devotion  to  the  instruments.  Of  this  extreme,  the  dan* 
ger  here  is,  I  think,  very  great.  Nay,  though  different  men's 
attention,  according  to  their  various  circumstances,  has  beeli 
fixed  on  different  instruments  in  the  hand  of  providence,  iit 
effecting  the  wonderful  revolution  then  brought  about)  yet  an 
immoderate  attachment  to  one,  or  other,  has  been,  since  the 
beginning,  the  rock  on  which  the  far  greater  part  of  protes« 
tants  have  split. 


u  d  d 


DISSERTATION 

ON 

MIRACLES: 

CONTAINING, 

AN  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  PRINCIPLES  ADVANCED  BY 
DAVID  HUME,  ESQ. 

IN  AN 

.    ESSAY  ON  MIRACLES. 


The  works  that  I  do  in  my  Father's  name,  they  bea? 
witness  of  me.    yobn  x.  25. 


Advertisement. 


1  T  is  not  the  only^  nor  even  the  chiefs  design  of  these  sheets^ 
to  refute  the  reasoning  and  objections  of  Mr.  Hume^  -with  regard 
to  miracles  :  the  chief  design  of  them  is^  to  set  the  principal  ar- 
gument for  Christianity  in  its  proper  light.  On  a  subject  that 
hath  been  so  often  treated^  ^tis  impossible  to  avoid  saying  many 
things  •which  have  been  said  before.  It  may^  hoivever^  with 
reason  be  affirmed^  that  there  still  remains^  on  this  subject^  great 
scope  for  new  observations.  Besides^  it  ought  to  be  remembered^ 
that  the  evidence  of  any  complex  argument  depends  very  much  on 
the  order  into  -which  the  material  circumstances  are  digested^  and 
the  manner  in  which  they  are  displayed. 

The  Essay  on  Miracles  deserves  to  be  considered^  as  one  of 
the  mast  dangerous  attacks  that  have  been  made  on  our  religion. 
The  danger  results  not  solely  from  the  merit  of  the  piece  ;  it 
results  much  more  from  that  of  the  author.  The  piece  itself 
like  every  other  work  of  Mr.  Hume^  is  ingenious  ;  but  its  merit 
is  more  of  the  oratorial  kind  than  of  the  philosophical.  The  me- 
rit of  the  author,  /  acknowledge  is  great.  The  many  useful 
volumes  he  hath  published  of  history,  a.y  -well  as  on  criticism, 
politicks,  awf/ trade,  have  justly  procured  him^  -with  all  persons 
of  taste  and  discernment^  the  highest  reputation  as  a  writer. 
What  pity  is  it^  that  this  reputation  should  have  been  sullied  by 
attempts  to  undermine  the  foundations  both  of  natural  religion 
and  of  revealed ! 

For  my  own  part^  I  think  it  a' piece  of  justice  in  me,  to  ac- 
knowledge the  obligations  I  ewe  the  author^  before  I  enter  on  the 
proposed  examination.  I  have  not  only  been  much  entertained 
and.  instructed  by  his  works  ;  but^  if  lam  possessed  of  any  ta- 
lent in  abstract  reasonings  lam  not  a  little  indebted  to  what  he 
hath  written  on  human  nature,  for  the  improvement  of  that 
talent.  If  therefore^  in  this  tracts  I  have  refuted  Mr.  Hume's 
Essay,  the  greater  share  of  the  merit  is  perhaps  to  be  ascribed 
to  Mr.  Hume  himself.  The  compliment  xuhich  the  Russian  mo- 
narchy after  the  famous  battle  of  Poltoxva^  paid  the  Swedish 
generals^  when  he  gave  them  the  honourable  appellation  of  his 
masters  in  the  art  of  war,  I  may^  xvith  great  sincerity ^  payt 
my  acute  and  ingenious  adversary. 


ADVERTISEMENT. 

/  shall  add  a  few  things  concerning  the  occasion  and  form  of 
the  following  dissertation. 

Some  of  the  principal  topicks  here  discussed^  were  more  hriefly 
treated  in  a  sermon  preached  before  the  Synod  of  Aberdeen, 
and  are  now  made  publick  at  their  desire.  To  the  end  that  an 
argument  of  so  great  importance  might  be  more  fully  and  freely 
canvassed  than  it  could  have  been^  with  propriety^  in  a  sermon^ 
it  was  judged  necessary  to  new-model  the  discourse^  and  to  give 
it  that  form  i?i  zvhich  it  noxv  appears. 

The  edition  of  Mr.  Hume^s  essays  to  which  I  always  refer  in 
this  Ivor ky  is  that  printed  at  L.ondon^  in  duodecimo^  1750,  enti" 
tled^  Philosophical  essays  concerning  human  understanding. 
I  have ^  since  finishing  this  tract^  seen  a  later  ^^xCvoxi^  in  which 
there  are  a  few  variations.  None  of  them  appeared  to  me  so 
material^  as  to  give  ground  for  altering  the  quotations  and  re- 
ferences here  used.  There  is  indeed  one  alteration,  -which  can-^ 
dour  required  that  I  should  mention  :  I  have  accordingly  men" 
tioned  it  in  a  note. 

The  arguments  of  the  essayist  I  have  endeavoured  to  refute 
hy  argument,  ^iere  declamation  /  know  no  zvay  of  refutingy 
but  by  analyzing  it ;  nor  do  I  conceive  how  inconsistencies  can 
he  anszvered  otherzvise  than  by  exposing  them.  In  such  analysis 
and  exposition,  tuhich^  J  ozvn,  I  have  atteinpted  without  cere- 
mony or  reserve^  an  air  of  ridicule  is  unavoidable :  but  this  ridi- 
cule, I  am  zvell  aware^  if  founded  in  misrepresentation,  zvill 
at  last  rebound  upon  myself.  It  is  possible y  that^  in  some 
things  I  have  mistaken  the  author"* s  meaning;  I  am  conscious^^ 
that  I  have  not.,  in  any  things  designedly  misrepresented  it. 


INTRODUCTION. 


''  Christianity,"  it  hath  been  said,  «  is  not  foundea 
in  argument."  If  it  were  only  meant  by  these  words,  that  the 
religion  of  Jesus  could  not,  by  the  single  aid  of  reasoning, 
produce  its  full  effect  upon  the  heart ;  every  true  Christian 
would  cheerfully  subscribe  to  them.  No  arguments  unaccom- 
panied by  the  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  can  convert  the 
soul  from  sin  to  God  ;  though  even  to  such  conversion,  argu- 
ments are,  by  the  agency  of  the  Spirit,  rendered  subservient. 
Again,  if  we  were  to  understand  by  this  aphorism,  that  the 
principles  of  our  religion  could  never  have  been  discovered, 
by  the  natural  and  unassisted  faculties  of  man  ;  this  position,  I 
presume,  would  be  as  little  disputed  as  the  former.  But  if,  on 
the  contrary,  under  the  cover  of  an  ambiguous  expression,  it 
is  intended  to  insinuate,  that  those  principles,  from  their  very 
nature,  can  admit  no  rational  evidence  of  their  truth,  (and. 
this,  by  the  way,  is  the  only  meaning  which  can  avail  our  an- 
tagonists) the  gospel,  as  well  as  common  sense,  loudly  re- 
claims against  it. 

The  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  author  of  our  religion,  often, 
argued,  both  with  his  disciples  and  with  his  adversaries,  as 
with  reasonable  men,  on  the  principles  of  reason,  without  this 
faculty,  he  well  knew,  they  could  not  be  susceptible  either  of 
religion  or  of  law.  He  argued  from  prophecy,  and  the  confor- 
mity of  the  event  to  the  prediction*.  He  argued  from  the  tes- 
timony of  John  the  Baptist,  who  was  generally  acknowledged 
to  be  a  prophet  f.  He  argued  from  the  miracles  which  he 
himself  performed!,  as  uncontrovertible  evidences,  that  God 
Almighty  operated  by  him,  and  had  sent  him.  He  expostu- 
lates with  his  enemies,  that  they  did  not  use  their  reason  on 
this  subject.  Why^  says  he,  even  of  yourselves^  judge  ye  not 
what  is  right  ^t  In  like  manner  we  are  called  upon  by  the 
apostles  of  our  Lord,  to  act  the  part  oiwise  vien  zr\d  Judge  im- 
partially of  zvhat  they  say^.  Those  who  do  so,  are  highly  com- 
mended, for  the  candour  and  prudence  they  discover,  in  an  af- 
fair of  so  great  consequence  •[[.     We  are  even  commanded,  to 

•  Luke  xxiv.  25.  &c.  John  v.  39,  &  46.  f  Jo^"  v.  32.  &  33.  \  John  v.  36., 
X.  25,  37.  38.  xiv.  10, 11.        ||  Luke  xii.  57.      §lCorx.l5.       ^  Acts  xvli.  H. 


400  INTRODUCTION. 

be  always  ready  to  give  an  answer  to  every  man  that  asketh  us  ct 
reason  of  our  hope*  ;  in  meekness  to  instruct  them  that  oppose 
themselves'f  ;  and  earnestly  to  contend  for  the  faith  -which  was 
once  delivered  to  the  saints\.  God  has  neither  in  natural  nor 
revealed  religion,  left  himself  without  a  zvitness  ;  but  has  in  both 
given  moral  and  external  evidence,  sufficient  to  convince  the 
impartial,  to  silence  the  gainsayer,  and  to  render  inexcusable 
the  atheist  and  the  unbeliever.  This  evidence  it  is  our  duty  to 
attend  to,  and  candidly  to  examine.  We  must  prove  all  things 
as  we  are  expressly  enjoined  in  holy  writ,  if  we  would  ever 
hope  to  holdfast  that  -which  is  good  ||. 

Thus  much  I  thought  proper  to  premise,  not  to  serve  as  an 
apology  for  the  design  of  this  tract,  (the  design  surely  needs 
no  apology,  whatever  the  world  may  judge  of  the  execution) 
but  to  expose  the  shallowness  of  that  pretext,  under  which  the 
advocates  for  infidelity  in  this  age  commonly  take  shelter. 
Whilst  therefore  we  enforce  an  argument,  which,  in  support  of 
©ur  religion,  was  so  frequently  insisted  on  by  its  divine  found- 
er, we  will  not  dread  the  reproachful  titles  of  dangerous  friends^ 
or  disguised  enemies  of  revelation.  Such  are  the  titles,  which  the 
writer  whose  sentiments  we  propose  in  these  papers  to  can- 
vass, hath  bestowed  on  his  antagonists^ ;  not,  I  believe,  through 
malice  against  them,  but  as  a  sort  of  excuse  for  himself,  or  at 
least  a  handle  for  introducing  a  very  strange  and  unmeaning 
compliment  to  the  religion  of  his  country,  after  a  very  bold 
attempt  to  undermine  it.  We  will  however  do  him  the  justice 
to  own,  that  he  hath  put  it  outof  our  power  to  retort  the  charge. 
No  intelligent  person,  who  hath  carefully  perused  the  Essay 
sn  Miracles^  will  impute  to  the  author  either  of  those  igno- 
minious characters. 

^ly primary  intention  in  undertaking  an  answer  to  the  afore- 
said essay,  hath  invariably  been,  to  contribute  all  in  my  power 
to  the  defence  of  a  religion^  which  I  esteem  the  greatest  bless- 
ing conferred  by  Heaven  on  the  sons  of  men.  It  is  at  the 
same  time  a  secondary  motive  of  considerable  weight,  to  vin- 
dicate philosophy^  at  least  that  most  important  branch  of  it 
which  ascertains  the  rules  of  reasoning,  from  those  absurd 
consequences,  which  this  author's  theory  naturally  leads  us  to. 
The  theme  is  arduous.  The  adversary  is  both  subtle  and 
powerful.  With  such  an  adversary,  I  should  on  very  unequal 
terms  enter  the  lists,  had  I  not  the  advantage  of  being  on  the 
side  of  truth.  And  an  eminent  advantage  this  doubtless  is. 
It  requires  but  moderate  abilities  to  speak  in  defence  of  a 
50od  cause.     A  good  cause  demands  but  a  distinct  exposition 

*1  Peter  iii.  15.      t  2  Tim.  u.  25.      :^Jude3.       |1  I  Thess.  v.  21.       ^p.204-. 


INTRODUCTION.  401 

and  a  fair  hearing  ;  and  we  may  say  with  great  propriety,  it 
will  speak  for  itself.  But  to  adorn  errour  with  the  sem- 
blance of  truth,  and  make  the  worse  appear  the  better  reason^ 
requires  all  the  arts  of  ingenuity  and  invention  ;  arts  in  which 
few  or  none  have  been  more  expert  than  Mr  Hume.  It  is 
much  to  be  regretted,  that  on  some  occasions  he  hath  so  ill 
applied  them. 


Hi  e  e 


DISSERTATION 

ON 

M  I  R  A  C  L  E  S. 


PART  I. 

Miracles  are  capable  of  proof  from  testimony,  and  religious 
miracles  are  not  less  capable  of  this  evidence  than  others. 

SECTION  L 

Mr»  Hume^s  favourite  argument  is  founded  on  a  false  hypothesis, 

XT  is  not  the  aim  of  this  author  to  evimce,  that  miracles,  if 
admitted  to  be  true,  would  not  be  a  sufficient  evidence  of  a 
divine  mission.  His  design  is  solely  to  prove,  that  miracles 
which  have  not  been  the  objects  of  our  own  senses,  at  least 
such  as  are  said  to  have  been  performed  in  attestation  of  any 
religious  system,  cannot  reasonably  be  admitted  by  us,  or  be- 
lieved on  the  testimony  of  others.  "  A  miracle,"  says  he,^ 
*'  supported  by  any  human  testimony,  is  more  properly  a  sub- 
**  ject  of  derision  than  of  argument."*  Again,  in  the  conclu- 
sion of  his  essay,  *'  Upon  the  whole,  it  appears,  that  no  testi- 
*'  mony,  for  any  kind  of  miracle,  can  ever  possibly  amount  to 
"  a  probability,  much  less  to  a  proof."f  Here  he  concludes 
against  all  miracles.  "  Any  kind  of  miracle"  are  his  express 
words.  He  seems  however  immediately  sensible,  that  in  as- 
serting this,  he  hath  gone  too  far  ;  and  therefore,  in  the  end  of 
the  same  paragraph,  retracts  part  of  what  he  had  advanced  in 
the  beginning,  "  We  may  establish  it  as  a  maxim  that  no  hu« 
"  man  testimony  can  have  such  force,  as  to  prove  a  miracle, 
"  and  make  it  a  just  foundation  for  any  system  of  religion." 
In  the  note  on  this  passage,  he  has  these  words.     <'  I  beg  the 

*  Page  194.  t  P-  202. 


404  MIRACLES  CAPABLE  OF  Part  L 

*'  limitation  here  made,  may  be  remarked,  when  I  say,  that  a 
*'  miracle  can  never  be  proved,  so  as  to  be  the  foundation  of  a 
*'  system  of  religion.  For  I  own  that  otherwise  there  may 
*'  possibly  be  miracles,  or  violations  of  the  usual  course  of  na- 
"  ture,  of  such  a  kind,  as  to  admit  of  proof  from  human  testi- 
*'  mony." 

So  much  for  that  cardinal  point,  which  the  essayist  labours 
so  strenuously  to  evince  ;  and  which,  if  true,  will  not  only  be 
subversive  of  revelation,  as  received  by  us,  on  the  testimony 
of  the  apostles,  and  prophets,  and  martyrs  ;  but  will  directly 
lead  to  this  general  conclusion :  '  That  it  is  impossible  for  God 

*  Almighty  to  give  a  revelation,  attended  with  such  evidence 

*  that  it  can  be  reasonably  believed  in  after-ages,  or  even  in  the 

*  same  age,  by  any  person  who  hath  not  been  an  eye-witness  of 

*  the  miracles,  by  which  it  is  supported.' 

Now,  by  what  wonderful  process  of  reasoning  is  this  strange- 
conclusion  made  out  ?  Several  topicks  have  been  employed  for 
the  purpose  by  this  subtle  disputant.  Among  these  there  is 
one  principal  argument  which  he  is  at  great  pains  to  set  off 
to  the  best  advantage.  Here  indeed  he  claims  a  particular 
concern,  having  discovered  it  himself.  His  title  to  the  honour 
of  the  discovery,  it  is  not  my  business  to  controvert ;  I  confine 
myself  entirely  to  the  consideration  of  its  importance.  To 
this  end  I  shall  now  lay  before  the  reader,  the  unanswerable 
argument,  as  he  flatters  himself  it  will  be  found  ;  taking  the 
freedom  for  brevity's  sake,  to  compendize  the  reasoning,  and 
to  omit  whatever  is  said  merely  for  illustration.  To  do  other- 
wise would  lay  me  under  the  necessity  of  transcribing  the 
greater  part  of  the  essay. 

*  Experience,'  says  he,  *  is  our  only  guide  in  reasoning  con- 
'  ceming  matters  of  fact*.     Experience  is  in  some  things  va- 

*  riable,  in  some  things  uniform,     A  variable  experience  gives 

*  rise  only  to  probability  j  an  uniform  experience  amounts  to  a 

*  proof-j-.     Probability  always  supposes  an  opposition  of  experi- 
'  ments  and  observations,  where  the  one  side  is  found  to  overr 

*  balance  the  other,  and  to  produce  a  degree  of  evidence  pro- 
'  portioned  to  the  superiority.     In  such  cases  we  must  balance 

*  the  opposite  experiments,  and  deduct  the  lesser  number  from 

*  the  greater,  in  order  to  know  the  exact  force  of  the  superiour 

*  evidencej.     Our  belief  or  assurance  of  any  fact  from  the  re- 

*  port  of  eye-witnesses,  is  derived  from  no  other  principle  than 

*  experience  ;  that  is,  our  observation  of  the  veracity  of  human 

*  testimony,  and  of  the  usual  conformity  of  facts  to  the  reports 

*  of  witnessesil.       Now,  if  the  fact  attested  partakes  of  the 

*  marvellous,  if  it  is  such  as  has  seldom  fallen  under  our  ob- 

*  P.  174.      t  p-  175,  ire.      I  ibid,      y  p,  176. 


Sect.  1.         PROOF  FROM  TESTIMONY.  405 

*  servation,  here  is  a  contest  of  two  opposite  experiences,  of 

*  which  the  one  destroys  the  other,  as  far  as  its  force  goes, 

*  and  the  superiour  can  only  operate  on  the  mind  by  the  force 

*  which   remains.     The   very  same  principle   of  experience, 

*  which  gives  us  a  certain  degree  of  assurance  in  the  testimony 
••  of  witnesses,  gives  us  also,  in  this  case,  another  degree  of 
••  assurance,  against  the  fact  which  they  endeavour  to  establish  j 
'  from  which  contradiction,  there  necessarily  arises  a  counter- 
*■  poise,  and  mutual  destructionof  belief  and  authority^.  Fur- 
'  ther,  if  the  fact  affirmed  by  the  witnesses,  instead  of  being 
'  only  marvellous,  is  really  miraculous ;   if  besides  the  testi- 

*  mony  considered  apart  and  in  itself,  amounts  to  an  entire 
;*^  proof ;  in  that  case  there  is  proof  against  proof,  of  which  the 

*  strongest  must  prevail,  but  still  with  a  diminution  of  its  force, 
.'  in  proportion  to  that  of  its  antagonist.  A  miracle  is  a  viola- 
'  tion  of  the  laws  of  nature  ;  and  as  a  firm  and  unalterable  expe- 
'  rience  has  established  these  laws,  the  proof  against  a  miracle 
'  from  the  very  nature  of  the  fact,  is  as  entire  as  any  argument 

*  from  experience  can  possibly  be  imaginedj-.  And  if  so,  it  is 
^  an  undeniable  consequence,  that  it  cannot  be  surmounted  by 

*  any  proof  whatever  from  testimony.     A  miracle,  therefore, 

*  however  attested,  can  never  be  rendered  credible,  even  in  the 

*  lowest  degree.'  This,  in  my  apprehension,  is  the  sum  of  the 
argument  on  which  my  ingenious  opponent  rests  the  strength 
;Qf  his  cause. 

>•  In  answer  to  this  I  propose  first  to  prove,  that  the  whole  is 
built  upon  a  false  hypothesis.  That  the  evidence  of  testimony 
is  derived  solely  from  experience,  which  seems  to  be  an  axiom 
of  this  writer,  is  at  least  not  so  incontestable  a  truth  as  he  sup- 
poses it ;  that,  on  the  contrary,  testimony  hath  a  natural  and 
■original  influence  on  belief,  antecedent  to  experience,  will,  I 
imagine,  easily  be  evinced.  For  this  purpose  let  it  be  remark- 
ed, that  the  earliest  assent,  which  is  given  to  testimony  by 
children,  and  which  is  previous  to  all  experience,  is  in  fact  the 
most  unlimited,  that  by  a  gradual  experience  of  mankind,  it  is 
gradually  contracted,  and  reduced  to  narrower  bounds.  To 
say,  therefore,  that  our  diffidence  in  testimony  is  the  result  of 
experience,  is  more  philosophical,  because  more  consonant  to 
truth,  than  to  say  that  our  faith  in  testimony  has  this  founda- 
tion. Accordingly  youth,  which  is  unexperienced,  is  credu- 
lous ;  age,  on  the  contrary,  is  distrustful.  Exactly  the  reverse 
would  be  the  case  were  this  author's  doctrine  just. 

Perhaps  it  will  be  said.  If  experience  is  allowed  to  be  the 
only  measure  of  a  logical  or  reasonable  faith  in  testimony,  the 

*  P.  179.        t  P-  180. 


405  MIRACLES  CAPABLE  OF  Part  L 

question,  Whether  the  injluence  of  testimony  on  beliefs  be  original 
or  derived?  if  it  is  not  merely  verbal,  is  at  least  of  no  import- 
ance in  the  present  controversy.  But  I  maintain  it  is  of  the 
greatest  importance.  The  difference  between  us  is  by  no 
means  so  inconsiderable,  as  to  a  careless  view  it  may  appear. 
Accordirig  to  his  philosophy,  the  presumption  is  against  the 
testimony  or  (which  amounts  to  the  same  thing)  there  is  not 
the  smallest  presumption  in  its  favour,  till  properly  supported 
by  experience.  According  to  the  explication  given,  there  is  the 
strongest  presumption  in  favour  of  the  testimony,  till  properly 
refuted  by  experience. 

If  it  be  objected  by  the  author,  that  such  a  faith  in  testimony 
as  is  prior  to  experience,  must  be  unreasonable  and  unphilo- 
sophical,  because  unaccountable  ;  I  should  reply,  that  there  are, 
and  must  be  in  human  nature,  some  original  grounds  of  belief, 
beyond  which  our  researches  cannot  proceed,  and  of  which 
therefore  it  is  vain  to  attempt  a  rational  account.  I  should  de- 
sire the  objector  to  give  a  reasonable  account  of  his  faith  in 
this  principle,  that  similar  causes  al-ways  produce  similar  effects  ; 
or  in  this,  that  the  course  of  nature  -will  he  the  same  to-morrow^ 
that  it  was  yestcrdat^^  and  is  to-day  :  principles,  which  he  him- 
self acknowledges,  are  neither  intuitively  evident,  nor  deduced 
from  premises  ;  and  which  nevertheless  we  are  under  a 
necessity  of  presupposing,  in  all  our  reasonings  from  ex- 
perience*. I  should  desire  him  to  give  a  reasonable  ac- 
count of  his  faith  in  the  clearest  informations  of  his  memory, 
which  he  will  find  it  alike  impossible  either  to  doubt,  or  to  ex- 
plain. Indeed  memory  bears  nearly  the  same  relation  to  ex- 
perience, that  testimony  does.  Certain  it  is  that  the  defects 
and  misrepresentations  of  memory  ari  often  corrected  by  ex- 
perience. Yet  should  any  person  herice  infer,  that  memory 
derives  all  its  evidence  from  experience,  he  would  fall  into  a 
manifest  absurdity.  For,  on  the  contrary,  experience  derives 
its  origin  solely  from  memory,  and  is  nothing  else  but  the  ge- 
neral maxims  or  conclusions,  we  have  formed  from  the  com- 
parison of  particular  facts  remembered.  If  we  had  not  pre- 
viously given  an  implicit  faith  to  memory,  we  had  never  been 
able  to  acquire  experience.  When  therefore  we  say  that  me- 
mory, which  gives  birth  to  experience,  may  nevertheless  in 
some  instances  be  con-ected  by  experience,  no  more  is  im- 
plied, bat  that  the  inferences  formed  from  the  most  lively  and 
perspicuous  reports  of  memory,  sometimes  serve  to  rectify 
the  mistakes  which  arise  from  such  reports  of  this  faculty,  as 

*  Sceptical  doubts.    Part  2'*. 


Sect.1,  PROOF  FROM  TESTIMONY.  40^ 

sire  most  languid  and  confused.  Thus  memory,  in  these  in- 
stances, may  be  said  to  correct  itself.  The  case  is  often  much 
the  same  with  experience  and  testimony,  as  will  appear  more 
clearly  in  the  second  section,  where  I  shall  consider  the  am- 
biguity of  the  word  experience^  as  used  by  this  author. 

But  how,  says  Mr.  Hume,  is  testimony  then  to  be  refuted  ? 
Principally  in  one  or  other  of  these  two  ways :  j^r^?,  and 
most  directly,  by  contradictory  testimony  ;  that  is,  when  an 
equal  or  greater  number  of  witnesses,  equally  or  more  cre- 
dible, attest  the  contrary :  secondly^  by  such  evidence  either 
of  the  incapacity  or  baseness  of  the  witnesses,  as  is  sufficient 
to  discredit  them.  What,  rejoins  my  antagonist,  cannot  then 
testimony  be  confuted  by  the  extraordinary  nature  of  the  fact 
attested  ?  Has  this  consideration  no  weight  at  all  ?  That  this 
consideration  hath  no  weight  at  all,  it  was  never  my  intention 
to  maintain ;  that  by  itself  it  can  very  rareh ,  if  ever,  amount 
to  a  refutation  against  ample  and  unexceptionable  testimony, 
I  hope  to  make  extremely  plain.  Who  hath  ever  denied,  that 
the  uncommonness  of  an  event  related,  is  a  presumption 
against  its  reality;  and  that  chiefly  on  account  of  the  ten- 
dency, which,  experience  teacheth  us,  and  this  author  hath 
observed,  some  people  have  to  sacrifice  truth  to  the  love  of 
wonder*?  The  question  only  is.  How  far  does  this  presump- 
tion extend?  In  the  extent  \vhich  Mr.  Hume  hath  assigned  it, 
Jhe  hath  greatly  exceeded  the  limits  of  nature,  and  conse- 
quently of  all  just  reasoning, 

;«  In  his  opinion,  **  When  the  fact  attested  is  such  as  has 
*'  seldom  fallen  under  our  observation,  there  is  a  contest  of 
**  two  opposite  experiences,  of  which  the  one  destroys  the 
**  other,  as  far  as  its  force  goes,  and  the  superiour  can  only 
*'  operate  on  the  mind,  by  the  force  which  remainsf ."  There 
is  a  metaphysical,  I  had  almost  said,  a  magical  balance  and 
arithmetick^  for  the  weighing  and  subtracting  of  evidence,  to 
which  he  frequently  recurs,  and  with  which  he  seems  to  fancy 
he  can  perforai  wonders.  I  wish  he  had  been  a  little  more 
explicit  in  teaching  us  how  these  rare  inventions  must  be 
used.  When  a  writer  of  genius  and  elocution  expresses  him- 
self in  general  terms,  he  will  find  it  an  easy  matter,  to  give  a 
•plausible  appearance  to  things  the  most  unintelligible  in  na- 
ture. Such  sometimes  is  this  author's  way  of  writing.  In 
the  instance  before  us  he  is  particularly  happy  in  his  choice  of 
«netaphors.  They  are  such  as  are  naturally  adapted  to  pre- 
possess a  reader  in  his  favour.  What  candid  person  can  think 
<jf  suspecting  the   impartiality  of  an  inquirer,  who   is  for 

*  p.  IM.  f  |).  179. 


408  JVIIRACLES  CAPABLE  OF  Parti. 

•weighing  in  1^&  scales  of  reason,  all  the  arguments  on  either 
side  ?  Who  can  suspect  his  exactness  who  determines  every 
thing  by  si  numerical  computation^  Hence  it  is,  that  to  a  super- 
ficial view  his  reasoning  appears  scarce  inferiour  to  demonstra- 
tion ;  but,  when  narrowly  canvassed,  it  is  impracticable  to  find 
an  application,  of  which,  in  a  consistency  with  good  sense,  it 
is  capable. 

In  confirmation  of  the  remark  just  now  made,  let  us  try 
how  his  manner  of  arguing  on  this  point  can  be  applied  to  a 
particular  instance.  For  this  purpose  I  make  the  following 
supposition.  I  have  lived  for  some  years  near  a  ferry.  It  con- 
sists with  my  knowledge  that  the  passage-boat  has  a  thousand 
times  crossed  the  river,  and  as  many  times  returned  safe.  An 
unknown  man,  whom  I  have  just  now  met,  tells  me  in  a 
serious  manner,  that  it  is  lost ;  and  affirms,  that  he  himself 
standing  on  the  bank,  was  a  spectator  of  the  scene  ;  that  he 
saw  the  passengers  carried  down  the  stream,  and  the  boat 
overwhelmed.  No  person,  who  is  influenced  in  his  judgment 
of  things,  not  by  philosophical  subtilties,  but  by  common 
sense,  a  much  surer  guide,  will  hesitate  to  declare,  that  in 
such  a  testimony  I  have  probable  evidence  of  the  fact  asserted. 
But  if  leaving  common  sense,  I  shall  recur  to  metaphysicks, 
and  submit  to  be  tutored  in  my  way  of  judging  by  the  es- 
sayist, he  will  remind  me,  "  that  there  is  here  a  contest  of 
"  two  opposite  experiences,  of  which  the  one  destroys  the 
*'  other,  as  far  as  its  force  goes,  and  the  superiour  can  only 
*'  operate  on  the  mind  by  the  fdrce  which  remains."  I  am 
warned,  that  "  the  very  same  principle  of  experience,  which 
'*  gives  me  a  certain  degree  of  assurance  in  the  testimony  of 
*'  the  witness  gives  me  also,  in  this  case,  another  degree  of 
"  assurance,  against  the  fact,  which  he  endeavours  to  estab- 
*'  lish,  from  which  contradiction  there  arises  a  counterpoise 
"  and  mutual  destruction  of  belief  and  authority*." — Well,  I 
would  know  the  truth,  if  possible  ;  and  that  I  may  conclude 
fairly  and  philosophically,  how  must  I  balance  these  opposite 
experiences,  as  you  are  pleased  to  term  them  ?  Must  I  set 
the  thousand,  or  rather  the  two  thousand  instances  of  the 
one  side,  against  the  single  instance  of  the  other  ?  In  that 
case,  it  is  easy  to  see,  I  have  nineteen  hundred  and  ninety- 
nine  degrees  of  evidence  that  my  information  is  false.  Or, 
is  it  necessary,  in  order  to  make  it  credible,  that  the  single 
instance  have  two  thousand  times  as  much  evidence,  as 
any  of  the  opposite  instances,  supposing  them  equal  among 
themselves  ;  or  supposing  them  unequal,  as  much  as  all  the 
two  thousand  put  together,  that  there  may  be  at  least  an 

•  p.  179. 


Sect.  L         PROOF  FROM  TESTIMONY.  409 

equilibrium  ?  Tiiis  is  impossible.  I  had  for  some  of  those 
instances,  the  evidence  of  sense,  which  hardly  any  testimony 
can  equal,  much  less  exceed.  Once  more,  must  the  evidence 
I  have  of  the  veracity  of  the  witness,  be  a  full  equivalent  to 
the  two  thousand  instances,  which  oppose  the  fact  attested  ? 
By  the  supposition,  I  have  no  positive  evidence  for  or  against 
his  veracity,  he  being  a  person  whom  I  never  saw  before. 
Yet  if  none  of  these  be  the  balancing,  which  the  essay-writer 
means,  I  despair  of  being  able  to  discover  his  meaning. 

Is  then  so  weak  a  proof  from  testimony  incapable  of  being 
tefuted  ?  1  am  far  from  thinking  sc  :  tho'  even  so  weak  a 
jproof  could  not  be  overturned  by  such  a  contrary  experience. 
How  then  may  it  be  overturned  ?  Firsts  by  contradictory  tes- 
timony. Going  homewards  1  meet  another  person,  whom  I 
know  as  little  as  I  did  the  former ;  finding  that  he  comes  fro«t 
the  ferry,  I  ask  him  concerning  the  truth  of  the  report.  He 
affirms  that  the  whole  is  a  fiction  ;  that  he  saw  the  boat,  and 
all  in  it,  come  safe  to  land.  This  would  do  more  to  turn  the 
scale,  than  fifty  thousand  such  contrary  instancesj  as  were. 
Supposed.  Yet  this  would  not  remove  suspicion.  Indeed,  if 
we  were  to  consider  the  matter  abstractly,  one  would  thinkj 
that  all  suspicion  would  be  removed,  that  the  two  Opposite 
testimonies  would  destroy  each  other,  and  leave  the  mind 
entirely  under  the  influence  of  its  former  experience,  in  the 
^ame  state  as  if  neither  testimony  had  been  given.  But  thia 
is  by  no  means  consonant  to  fact.  When  Once  testimonies 
are  introduced,  former  experience  is  generally  of  no  account 
in  the  reckoning  ;  it  is  but  like  the  dust  of  the  balance,  which 
hath  not  any  sensible  effect  upon  the  scales.  The  nlind  hangs 
in  suspence  between  the  two  contrary  declarations,  and  con* 
siders  it  as  one  to  one,  or  equal  improbability,  that  the  report 
is  true,  or  that  it  is  false.  Afterwards  a  third,  and  a  fourth, 
and  a  fifth,  confirm  the  declaration  of  the  second.  I  aiti  then 
quite  at  ease.  Is  this  the  only  effectual  way  of  confuting^  false 
testimony  ?  No.  I  suppose  again^  that  instead  Of  meeting 
with  any  person  who  can  itiform  me  concerning  the  fact^  1  get 
from  some,  who  are  acquainted  with  the  witness  inforrriation 
concerning  his  character.  They  tell  me,  he  is  notorious  for 
lying ;  and  that  his  lies  are  commonly  forged,  not  with  a  view 
to  interest,  but  merely  to  gratify  a  malicious  pleasure,  which 
he  takes  in  alarming  strangers.  This,  though  not  so  direct 
a  refutation  as  the  former,  will  be  sufficient  to  discredit  his 
report.  In  the  former,  where  there  is  testimony  contradict- 
ing testimony,  the  author's  metaphor  of  a  balance  may  be  used 
with  propriety.  The  things  weighed  are  homogeneal :  and 
when  contradictory  evidences  are  presented  to  the   mind, 

I-  ff 


410  MIRACLES  CAPABLE  OF  Part  I. 

tending  to  prove  positions  which  cannot,  be  both  true,  the 
mind  must  decide  on  the  comparative  strength  of  the  opposite 
evidences,  before  it  yield  to  either. 

But  is  this  the  case  in  the  supposition  first  made  ?  By  no 
means.  The  two  thousand  instances  formerly  known,  and 
the  single  instance  attested,  as  they  relate  to  different  facts, 
though  of  a  contrary  nature,  are  not  contradictory.  There  is  no 
inconsistency  in  believing  both.  There  is  no  inconsistency  in 
receiving  the  last  on  weaker  evidence,  ^if  it  be  sufficient  evi- 
dence) not  only  than  all  the  former  together,  but  even  than 
any  of  them  singly.  Will  it  be  said,  that  though  the  former 
instances  are  not  themselves  contradictory  to  the  fact  recently 
attested,  they  lead  to  a  conclusion  that  is  contradictory  ?  I 
answer,  It  is  true,  that  the  experienced  frequency  of  the  con- 
junction of  any  two  events,  leads  the  mind  to  infer  a  similar 
conjunction  in  time  to  come.  But  let  it  at  the  same  time  be 
remarked,  that  no  man  considers  this  inference,  as  having 
equal  evidence  with  any  one  of  those  past  events,  on  which  it 
is  founded,  and  for  the  belief  of  which  we  have  had  sufficient 
testimony.  Before  then  the  method  recommended  bv  this 
author  can  turn  to  any  account,  it  will  be  necessary  for  him  to 
compute  and  determine  with  precision,  how  many  hundreds, 
how  many  thousands,  I  might  say  how  many  myriads  of 
instances,  will  confer  such  evidence  on  the  conclusion  founded 
on  them,  as  will  prove  an  equipoise  for  the  testimony  of  one 
ocular  witness,  a  man  of  probity,  in  a  case  of  which  he  is 
allowed  to  be  a  competent  judge. 

There  is  in  arithmetick  a  rule  called  reduction,  by  which 
numbers  of  different  denominations  are  brought  to  the  same 
denomination.  If  this  ingenious  author  shall  invent  a  rule 
in  logick^  analogous  to  this,  for  reducing  different  classes  of 
evidence  to  the  same  class,  he  will  bless  the  world  with  a 
most  important  discovery.  Then  indeed  he  will  have  the 
honour  to  establish  an  everlasting  peace  in  the  republick  of 
letters  ;  then  we  shall  have  the  happiness  to  see  controversy 
of  every  kind,  theological,  historical,  philosophical,  receive 
its  mortal  wound  :  for  though,  in  every  question,  we  could 
not  even  then  determine  with  certainty,  on  which  side  the 
truth  lay,  we  could  always  determine  (and  that  is  the  utmost 
the  nature  of  the  thing  admits)  with  as  much  accuracy  as 
geometry  and  algebra  can  afford,  on  which  side  the  probability 
lay,  and  in  what  degree.  But  till  this  metaphysical  reduction 
is  discovered,  it  will  be  impossible  where  the  evidences  are  of 
different  orders,  to  ascertain  by  .subtraction  the  superiour  evi- 
dence. We  could  not  but  esteem  him  a  novice  in  arithmetick, 
who  being  asked,  whether  seven  pounds  or  eleven  pence  make 


Sect.  I.  PROOF  FROM  TESTIMONY.  411 

the  greater  sum,  and  what  is  the  difference?  should,  by  attend- 
ing solely  to  the  numbers,  and  overlooking  the  value,  conclude 
that  eleven  pence  were  the  greater,  and  that  it  exceeded  the 
other  by  four.  Must  we  not  be  equal  novices  in  reasoning,  if 
we  follow  the  same  absurd  method  ?  Must  we  not  fall  into  as 
great  blunders  ?  Of  as  little  sigrificancy  do  we  find  the 
balance.  Is  the  value  of  things  heterogeneal  to  be  deter- 
mined merely  by  weight  ?  Shall  silver  be  weighed  against 
lead,  or  copper  against  iron  ?  If  in  exchange  for  a  piece 
of  gold,  I  were  offered  some  counters  of  baser  metal,  is  it 
not  obvious,  that  till  I  know  the  comparative  value  of  the 
metals,  in  vain  shall  I  attempt  to  find  what  is  equivalent,  by 
the  assistance  either  of  scales  or  arithmetick  ? 

It  is  an  excellent  observation,  and  much  to  the  purpose, 
which  the  late  learned  and  pious  bishop  of  Durham,  in  his 
admirable  performance  on  the  analogy  of  religion  to  the 
course  of  nature,  hath  made  on  this  subject.  "  There  is  a 
*'  very  strong  presumption,"  says  he,  *'  against  the  most 
"  ordinary  facts,  before  the  proof  of  them,  which  yet  is  over- 
*'  come  by  almost  any  proof.  There  is  a  presumption  of 
*'  millions  to  one  against  the  story  of  Csesar,  or  of  any  other 
*'  man.  For  suppose  a  number  of  common  facts,  so  and  so 
*'  circumstanced,  of  which  one  had  no  kind  of  proof,  should 
"  happen  to  come  into  one's  thoughts  every  one  would,  with- 
"  out  any  possible  doubt,  conclude  them  to  be  false.  The 
**  like  may  be  said  of  a  single  common  fact*."  What  then,  I 
may  subjoin,  shall  be  said  of  an  uncommon  fact  ?  And  that 
an  uncommon  fact  may  be  proved  by  testimony,  hath  not  yet 
been  made  a  question.  But  in  order  to  illustrate  the  obser- 
vation above  cited,  suppose,  first,  one  at  random  mentions, 
that  at  such  an  hour,  of  such  a  dav,  in  such  a  part  of  the 
heavens,  a  comet  xvill  appear;  the  conclusion  from  experience 
would  not  be  as  millions,  but  as  infinite  to  one,  that  the  pro- 
position is  false.  Instead  of  this,  suppose  you  have  the  tes- 
timony of  but  one  ocular  witness,  a  man  of  integritr,  and^ 
skilled  in  astronomy,  that  at  such  an  hour,  of  such  a  day,  in 
such  a  part  of  the  heavens,  a  comet  did  appear  ;  you  will  not 
hesitate  one  moment  to  give  him  credit.  Yet  all  the  presump* 
tion  that  was  against  the  truth  of  the  first  supposition,  though 
almost  as  strong  evidence  as  experience  can  aflord,  was  also 
against  the  truth  of  the  second,  before  it  was  thus  attested 

It  is  necessary  to  urge  further,  in  support  of  this  doctrine, 
that  as  the  water  in  the  canal  cannot  be  made  to  rise  higher 
than  the  fountain  whence  it  flows  ;  so  it  is  impossible,  that 
the  evidence  of  testimony,  if  it  proceeded  from  experience,, 

*  Part  2.  chap.  2.    S3. 


413  MIRACLES  CAPABLE  OF  Par,t  L 

should  ever  exceed  that  of  experience,  which  is  its  source  ? 
Yet  that  it  greatly  exceeds  this  evidence,  appears  not  only 
from  what  hath  been  observed  already,  but  still  more,  from 
what  I  shall  have  occasion  to  observe  in  the  sequel.     One 
may  safely  affirm,  that  no  conceivable    conclusion  from    ex-i» 
perience,  can  possess  stronger  evidence,  than  that  which  as-.v 
certains  us  of  the  regular  succession  and  duration  of  daN-  andp 
pight.     The  reason  is,  the  instances  on  which  this  experience 
is  founded,  are  both  without  number  and  without  exception. 
Yet  even  this  conclusion,   the  author  admits,  as  we  shall  see 
in  the  third  section,  may,  in  a  particular  instance,  not  only  be 
surmounted,  but  even  annihilated  by  testimony. 

Lastly,  let  it  be  observed,  that  the  immediate  conclusion 
from  experience  is  always  ge7i€ral^  and  runs  thus  :   •■  This  is 

*  the  ordinary  course  of  nature.'    '  Such  an  event  may  rea- 

*  sonably  be  expected,  where  all  the  circumstances  are  entirely 
similar.'  But  when  we  descend  to  particulai-s,  the  conclusion 
becomes  weaker,  being  more  indirect.  For  though  all  the 
known  circumstances  be  similar,  all  the  actual  circumstances 
may  not  be  similar  :  nor  is  it  possible  in  any  case  to  be 
assured  (our  knowledge  of  things  being  at  best  but  superficial,) 
that  all  the  actual  circumstances  are  known  to  us.  On  the 
contrary,  the  direct  conclusion  from  testimony  is  always 
particular^  and  runs  thus  ;  '  This  is  the  fact  in  such  an  indi- 
'  vidual  instance.'  The  remark  noAv  niade  will  serve  both  to 
throw  light  on  some  of  the  preceding  observations  and  to 
indicate  the  proper  sphere  of  each  species  of  evidence.  Ex- 
perience of  the  past  is  the  only  rule  whereby  we  can  judge 
concerning  the  future :  And  as  when  the  sun  is  below  thai 
horizon,  we  must  do  the  best  we  can  by  light  of  the  moonj 
or  even  of  the  stars  ;  so  in  all  cases  where  we  have  no  testi- 
mony, we  are  under  a  necessity  of  recurring  to  experience, 
and  of  balancing  or  numbering  contrary  observations*.     But 

*  Wherever  such  balancing  or  numbering  can  take  place,  the  opposite  evi- 
dences must  be  entirely  similar.  It  will  rarely  assist  us  in  judging  of  facts  sup- 
ported by  testimony  ;  for  even  where  contradictory  testimonies  come  to  be  con- 
sidered, you  will  hardly  find  that  the  characters  of  the  witnesses  on  the  opposite 
sides  are  so  precisely  equal,  as  that  an  arithmetical  operation  will  evolve  the 
credibility.  In  matters  of  pure  experience  it  hath  often  place.  Hence  the  com- 
putations that  have  been  made  of  the  value  of  annuities,  insurances,  and  several 
other  commercial  articles.  In  calculations  concerning  chances,  the  degree  of  pro- 
bability may  be  determined  with  mathematical  exactness.  I  shall  here  take  the 
liberty,  though  the  matter  be  not  essential  to  the  design  of  this  tract,  to  correct 
an  oversight  in  the  essayist,  who  always  supposes,  that  where  contrary  evidences 
must  be  balanced,  the  probability  lies  in  the  remainder  or  surplus,  when  the  less 
number  is  subtracted  fromi  the  greater.  The  probability  doth  not  consist  in  the 
surplus,  but  in  the  ratio,  or  geomerricai  proportion,  which  the  numbers  on  the 
opposite  sides  bear  to  each  other.    I  explain  myself  thus.    In  favour  of  one  sup- 


Sect.  1.         PROOF  FROM  TESTIMONY.  413 

the  evidence  resulting  hence,  even  in  the  clearest  cases,  is  ac- 
knowledged to  be  so  weak,  compared  with  that  which  results 
from  testimony,  that  the  strongest  conviction  built  mere!)  on 
the  former,  may  be  overturned  by  the  slightest  proof  exhibited 
by  the  latter.  Accordingly  the  future  hath  in  all  ages  and 
nations  been  denominated  the  province  of  conjecture  and  un- 
certainty. 

From  what  hath  been  said,  the  attentive  reader  will  easily 
discover,  that  the  author's  argument  against  miracles^  hath 
not  the  least  affinity  to  the  argument  used  by  Dr.  Tiilotson 
against  transubstantiation^  with  which  Mr.  Hume  hath  intro- 
duced his  subject.  Let  us  hear  the  argument,  as  it  is  related 
in  the  Essay,  from  the  writings  of  the  Archbishop.  "  It  is 
*'  acknowledged  on  all  hands,  says  that  learned  prelate,  that 
*'  the  authority  either  of  the  scripture  or  of  tradition,  is 
*>^  founded  merely  on  the  testimony  of  the  apostles,  who  were 
*'  eye-witnesses  to  those  miracles  of  our  Saviour,  by  which  he 
"  proved  his  divine  mission.  Our  evidence  then  for  the  truth 
*'  of  the  Christian  religion,  is  less  than  the  evidence  for  the 
"  truth  of  our  senses  ;  because  even  in  the  first  authors  of  our 
*'  religion,  it  was  no  greater  ;  and  it  is  evident,  it  must  dimi- 
*'  nish  in  passing  from  them  to  their  disciples  ;  nor  can  any 
^'  one  be  so  certain  of  the  truth  of  their  testimony,  as  of  the 
*'  immediate  objects  of  his  senses.  But  a  weaker  evidence 
*'  can  never  destroy  a  stronger ;  and  therefore,  were  the  doc- 
^'  trine  of  the  real  presence  ever  so  clearly  revealed  in  scrip- 
*'  ture,  it  were  directly  contrary  to  the  rules  of  just  reasoning 
^'  to  give  our  assent  to  it.  It  contradicts  sense,  though  both 
*'  the  scripture  and  tradition,  on  which  it  is  supposed  to  be 
**  built,  carry  not  such  evidence  with  them  as  sense,  when  they 
*'  are  considered  merely  as  external  evidences,  and  are  not. 
*'  brought  home  to  every  one's  breast,  by  the  immediate  ope- 
"  ration  of  the  Holy  Spirit*."  That  the  evidence  of  testimony 
is  less  than  the  evidence  of  sense^  is  undeniable.  Sense  is  the 
source  of  that  evidence,  which  is  first  transferred  to  the  me- 
mory of  the  individual,  as  to  a  general  reservoir,  and  thence 
transmitted  to  others  l)y  the  channel  of  testimony.  That  the 
original  evidence  can  never  gain  any  thing,  but  must  lose,  by 
the  transmission,  is  beyond  dispute.     What  hath  been  rightly 

posed  event,  there  are  100  similar  instances,  against  it  50.  In  another  case  undeir 
consideration,  the  favourable  instances  are  60,  and  only  10  unfavourable.  Though 
the  difference,  or  arithmetical  proportion,  which  is  50,  be  the  same  in  both  cases,' 
the  probability  is  by  no  means  equal,  as  the  author's  way  of  reasoning  implies. 
The  probability  of  the  first  event  is  as  100  to  50,  or  2  to  1.  The  probability  of 
the  second  is  as  60  to  10,  or  6  to  1.  Consequently  on  comparing  the  different 
examples,  though  both  be  probable,  the  second  is  thrice  as  probable  as  the  first. 

*  p.  173,  m. 


414.  MIRACLES  CAPABLE  OF  Part  L 

perceived,  may  be  misremembered ;  wh  it  is  rightly  remem- 
bered may,  through  incapacity,  or  through  ill  intemion,  be 
misreported ;  and  what  is  rightly  reported  may  be  misunder- 
stood. In  any  of  these  four  ways  therefore,  either  by  defect 
of  memory,  of  elocution,  or  of  veracity  in  the  relater,  or  by 
misapprehension  in  the  hearer,  there  is  a  chance,  that  the  truth 
received  by  the  information  of  the  senses,  may  be  misrepre- 
sented or  mistaken  ;  now  every  such  chance  occasions  a  real 
diminution  of  the  evidence.  That  the  sacramental  elements 
are  bread  and  wine,  not  flesh  and  blood,  our  sight  and  touch, 
and  taste,  and  smell  concur  in  testifying.  If  these  senses  are 
liot  to  be  credited,  the  apostles  themselves  could  not  have  evi- 
dence of  the  mission  of  their  master.  For  the  greatest  ex- 
ternal evidence  they  had,  or  could  have,  of  his  mission,  was 
that  which  their  senses  gave  them,  of  the  reality  of  his  mira- 
cles. But  whatever  strength  there  is  in  this  argument  with 
regard  to  the  apostles,  the  argument  with  regard  to  us,  who, 
for  those  miracles,  have  only  the  evidence,  not  of  our  own 
senses,  but  of  their  testimony,  is  incomparably  stronger.  In 
their  case,  it  is  sense  contradicting  sense  ;  in  ours  it  is  sense 
contradicting  testimony.  But  what  relation  has  this  to  the 
author's  argument?  None  at  all.  Testimony,  it  is  acknow-* 
ledged,  is  a  weaker  evidence  than  sense.  But  it  hath  been 
already  evinced,  that  its  evidence  for  particular  facts  is  infinite- 
ly stronger  than  that  which  the  general  conclusion  from  expe- 
rience can  afford  us. — Testimony  holds  directly  of  memory 
and  sense.  Whatever  is  duly  attested  must  be  remembered 
by  the  witness ;  whatever  is  duly  remembered  must  once 
have  been  perceived.  But  nothing  similar  takes  place  with 
regard  to  experience,  nor  can  testimony,  with  any  appearance 
of  meaning,  be  said  to  hold  of  it. 

Thus  I  have  shown,  as  I  proposed,  that  the  author's  reason- 
ing proceeds  on  a  false  hypothesis. It  supposeth  testi- 
mony to  derive  its  evidence  solely  from  experience,  which  is 
false.- It  supposeth  by  consequence,  that  contrary  ob- 
servations have  a  weight  in  opposing  testimony,  which  the 
first  and  most  acknowledged  principles  of  human  reason,  or^ 
if  you  like  the  term   better,   common  sense,   evidently  shows 

that  they  have  not. It  assigns  a  rule  for  discovering  the 

superiority  of  contrary  evidences,  which,  in  the  latitude  there 
given  it,  tends  to  mislead  the  judgment,  and  which  it  is  impo$^ 
sible,  by  any  explication,  to  render  of  real  use. 


Sect.  2.         PROOF  FROM  TESTIMONY.  41^ 


SECTION  II. 

Mr.  Hume  charged  -with  some  fallacies  in  his  way  of  managing 
the  argument. 

AN  the  essay  there  is  frequent  mention  of  the  word  experience^ 
and  much  use  made  oi  it.  It  is  strange  that  the  author  hath 
not  favoured  us  with  the  definition  of  a  term  of  so  much  mo- 
ment to  his  argument.  This  defect  I  shall  endeavour  to  sup- 
ply ;  and  the  rather,  as  the  word  appears  to  be  equivocal,  and 
to  be  used  by  the  essayist  in  two  very  different  senses.  The 
first  and  most  proper  signification  of  the  word,  which,  for  dis- 
tinction's sake,  I  shall  caW  personal  experience,  is  that  given  in. 
the  preceding  section.     '  It  is,'  as  was  observed,  '  founded  in 

*  memory^  and  consists  solely  of  the  general  maxims  or  conclu- 

*  sions,  that  each  individual  hath  formed,  from  the  comparison 
'  of  the  particular  facts  he  hath  remembered.'  In  the  other 
signification,  in  which  the  word  is  sometimes  taken,  and  which 
I  shall  distinguish  by  the  term  derived,  it  may  be  thus  defined. 

*  It  is  founded  in  testimony^  and  consists  not  only  of  all  the  ex- 
'  periences  of  others,  which  have  through  that  channel  been 
'  communicated  to  us,  but  of  all  the  general  maxims  or  con- 

*  elusions  we  have  formed,  from  the  comparison  of  particular 

*  facts  attested.' 

In  proposing  his  argument  the  author  would  surely  be  un- 
derstood to  mean  only  personal  experience  ;  otherwise,  his 
making  testimony  derive  its  light  from  an  experience  which 
derives  its  light  from  testimony,  would  be  introducing  what 
logicians  term  a  circle  in  causes.  It  would  exhibit  the  same 
things  alternately,  as  causes  and  effects  of  each  other.  Yet 
nothing  can  be  more  limited,  than  the  sense  which  is  conveyed 
under  the  term  experience,  in  the  first  acceptation.  The  merest 
elown  or  peasant  derives  incomparably  more  knowledge  from 
testimony,  and  the  communicated  experience  of  others,  than 
in  the  longest  life  he  could  have  amassed  out  of  the  treasure, 
ol  his  own  memory.  Nay,  to  such  a  scanty  portion  the  savage 
himself  is  not  confined.  If  that  therefore  must  be  the  rule, 
the  only  rule,  by  which  every  testimony  is  ultimately  to  be 
judged,  our  belief  in  matters  of  fact  must  have  very  narrow 
bounds.  No  testimony  ought  to  have  any  weight  with  us, 
that  doth  not  relate  an  event,  similar  at  least  to  some  one  ob- 
servation, which  we  ourselves  have  had  access  to  make.  For 
example,  that  ther.^  are  such  people  on  the  earth  as  negroes, 
could  not,  on  that  hypothesis,  be  rendered  credible  to  one  who 
had  never  seen,  a  negro,  not  even  by  the  most  numerous  and, 


Miracles  capable  of         PanL 

the  most  unexceptionable  attestations.  Against  the  admission 
of  such  testimony,  however  strong,  the  whole  force  of  the 
author's  argument  evidently  operates.  But  that  innumerable 
absurdities  would  flow  from  this  principle,  I  might  easily 
evince,  did  I  not  think  the  task  superfluous. 

The  author  himself  is  aware  of  the  consequences ;  and 
therefore,  in  whatever  sense  he  uses  the  term  experience  in 
proposing  his  argument ;  in  prosecuting  it,  he  with  great  dex- 
terity shifts  the  sense,  and  ere  the  reader  is  apprised,  insinu- 
ates another.  "  It  is  a  miracle,"  says  he,  "  that  a  dead  mart 
*'  should  come  to  life,  because  that  has  never  been  observed 
*'  in  any  age  or  country.  There  must  therefore  be  an  uniform 
"  experience  against  every  miraculous  event,  otherwise  the 
"  event  would  not  merit  that  appellation*."  Here  the  phrase,, 
an  uniform  experience  against  an  events  in  the  latter  clause,  is 
implicidy  defined  in  the  former,  not  what  has  never  been  ob- 
served BY  us,  but  (mark  his  v/orcis)  xvhat  hafi  never  been  observ-^ 
ed  IN  ANY  AGE  OR  COUNTRY. — Now,  what  has  becin  observed, 
and  what  h'is  not  been  observed,  in  all  ages  and  countries,  pray 
how  can  you,  Sir,  or  I,  or  any  man,  come  to  the  knowledge  of? 
Only  I  suppose  by  testimony,  oral  or  written.  The  personal 
experience  of  every  individual  is  limited  to  but  a  part  of  one 
age,  and  commonly  to  a  narrow  spot  of  one  country.  If  there 
be  any  other  way  of  being  made  acquainted  with  facts,  it  is  to 
me,  I  own,  an  impenetrable  secret ;  I  have  no  apprehension  of 
it.  If  there  be  not  any,  what  shall  v/e  make  of  that  cardinal 
point,  on  which  his  argument  turns  ?  It  is  in  plain  language^ 
*:  Testimony  is  not  entitled  to  the  least  degree  of  faith,  but  as 

*  far  as  it  is  supported  by  such  an  extensive  experience,  as  if 
'  we   had  not  had  a  previous   and  independent  faith  in  testi- 

*  mony,  we  could  never  have  acquired.' 

How  natural  is  the  transition  from  one  sophism  to  another  ! 
You  will  soon  be  convinced  of  this,  if  you  attend  but  a  little  to 
the  strain  of  the  argument.  "  A  miracle,"  says  he,  ''  is  a 
*'  violation  of  the  laws  of  nature  ;  and  as  a  firm  and  unaltera- 
"  ble  experience  hath  established  these  laws,  the  proof  against 
"  a  miracle  is  as  entire,  as  any  argument  from  experience  can 
"  possibly  be  imaginedf."  Again,  "  As  an  uniform  experi- 
"  ence  amounts  to  a  proof,  there  is  here  a  direct  and  full  proof, 
*'  from  the  nature  of  the  fact,  against  the  existence  of  any  mi- 
''  raclej."  I  must  once  more  ask  the  author  what  is  the  pre- 
cise meaning  of  the  words  j^rm,  unalterable^  uniform  P  An 
experience  that  admits  no  exception,  is  surely  the  only  experi- 
ence, which  can  with  propriety  be  termed  uniform^  frm^  unal- 

*  p.  181.  tP'180-  tP'181. 


^edt.^.         pnt)0^  PR5M  TESTIMONY.  iif 

Wrdble.  Now  since,  as  was  remarked  above,  the  Far  greiatci* 
part  of  this  experience^  which  compiiseth  every  age  and  eVery 
couniry,  must  be  derived  to  us  from  testimony  ;  that  the  ex- 
perience may  be  Jirm^  unifotm^  unalterable^  ih<  re  must  be  nb 
contrary  testimony  whatever.  Yet  by  the  author's  own  hypo- 
thesis, the  miracles  he  would  thus  confute,  are  supported  by 
testimony.  At  the  same  time  to  give  Strength  to  his  argues 
ment,  he  is  under  a  necessity  of  supposing,  that  there  is  no 
exception  from  the  testimonies  against  them.  Thus  he  falls 
into  that  pat-alogism,  which  is  called  begging  the  question. 
What  he  gives  with  one  hand,  he  takes  with  the  other.  He 
admits,  in  opening  his  design,  what  in  his  argument  he  impli* 
citly  deniesi 

fiut  that  this,  if  possible,  may  be  still  mOre  manifest,  let  u& 
attend  a  little  to  some  expressions,  which  one  would  imagine 
lie  had  inadvertently  dropt.  '■'•  So  long,*'  says  he,  "  as  the 
*'  world  endures,  I  presume,  will  the  iiccounts  of  miracles  and 
**  prodigies  be  found  in  all  profane  history*.'*  Why  does  he 
presume  so?  Amah  so  much  attached  to  experience,  can 
nardly  be  suspected  to  have  any  other  reason  than,  because 
Such  accounts  have  hitherto  been  found  in  all  the  histories^ 
profane  as  well  as  sacred,  of  times  past.  But  we  need  not 
recur  to  an  inference  to  obtain  this  acknowledgment.  It  is 
often  to  be  met  with  in  the  essay^  In  One  place  we  learn,  that 
tlie  witnesses  for  miracles  are  an  infinite  number-]- ;  in  anotheirj 
that  ail  religious  records  of  whatever  kind  abound  with  them  j, 
I  leave  it  therefore  to  the  author  to  explain,  with  what  con- 
sistency he  can  assert,  that  the  laws  of  nature  are  established 
t)y  an  uniforni  experience,  (which  experience  is  chiefly  the 
Result  of  testimony)  and  at  the  same  time  allow,  that  almost  all 
Kuman  histories  are  full  of  the  relations  of  miracles  and  pro- 
digies, which  are  violations  of  those  laws.  Here  is,  by  his 
to\^n  confession,  testimonv  against  testimony,  and  very  ample 
on  both  sides.  How  then  can  one  side  claim  a  firm,  uniform^ 
and  unalterable  support  from  testimony  ? 

tt  will  be  in  vain  to  object,  that  the  testimony  in  support  of 
the  laws  of  nature,  greatly  exceeds  the  testimony  for  the  vio- 
I^ions  of  these  laws ;  and  that,  if  we  are  to  be  determined 
by  the  greater  number  of  observations,  we  shall  reject  all  mU 
racles  whatever.  I  ask.  Why  are  the  testimonies  much  more 
numerous  in  the  one  case  than  in  the  other  ?  The  answer  iS 
obvious :  Natural  occurrences  are  much  more  frequent  than 
such  as  are  preternatural.  But  are  all  the  accounts  we  have 
of  the  pestilence  to  be  rejected  as  inctedible,  because,  in  thi* 

•  p.  174.  t  p.  190.  t  p.  191. 

egg 


4ls  MIRACLES  CAPABLE  OF  Part  I. 

country,  we  hear  not  so  often  of  that  disease,  as  of  the  fever? 
Or,  because  the  number  of  natural  births  is  infinitely  greater 
than  that  of  monsters,  shall  the  evidence  of  the  former  be 
regarded  as  a  confutation  of  all  that  can  be  advanced  in  proof 
of  the  latter  ?  Such  an  objector  needs  to  be  reminded  of  what 
was  proved  in  the  foregoing  section  ;  that  the  opposite  testimo- 
nies relate  to  different  facts,  and  are  therefore  not  contradic- 
tory ;  that  the  conclusion  founded  on  them,  possesseth  not  the 
evidence  of  the  facts  on  which  it  is  founded,  but  only  such  a 
presumptive  evidence,  as  may  be  surmounted  by  the  slightest 
positive  proof.  A  general  conclusion  from  experience  is  in 
comparison  but  presumptive  and  indirect ;  sufficient  testimony 
for  a  particular  fact  is  direct  and  positive  evidence. 

I  shall  remark  one  other  fallacy  in  this  author's  reasoning, 
before  I  conclude  this  section.  "  The  Indian  prince,"  says 
he,  *'  who  refused  to  believe  the  first  relations  concerning  the 
*'  effects  of  frost,  reasoned  justl}  ;  and  it  naturally  required 
*'  very  strong  testimony  to  engage  his  assent  to  facts,  which 
"  arose  from  a  state  of  nature,  with  which  he  was  unacquaint- 
**  ed,  and  bore  so  little  analogy  to  those  events,  of  which  he 
*'  had  had  constant  and  uniform  experience.  Though  they 
"  were  not  contrary  to  his  experience,  they  were  not  conform- 
**  able  to  it*."  Here  a  distinction  is  artfully  suggested,  between, 
what  is  contrary  to  experience,  and  what  is  not  confortnahlt  to 
it.  The  one  he  allows  may  be  proved  by  testimony,  but  not 
the  other.  A  distinction,  for  which  the  author  seems  to  have 
so  great  use,  it  will  not  be  improper  to  examine. 

If  my  reader  happen  to  be  but  little  acquainted  with  Mr. 
Hume's  writings,  or  even  with  the  piece  here  examined,  I 
must  intreat  him,  ere  he  proceed  any  farther,  to  give  the  essay 
an  attentive  perusal ;  and  to  take  notice  paticularly,  whether 
in  one  single  passage,  he  can  find  any  other  sense  given  to  the 
terms  contrary  to  experience^  but  that  which  has  not  been  expe' 
rienced.  Without  this  aid,  I  should  not  be  surprised,  that  I 
found  it  difficult  to  convince  the  judicious,  that  a  man  of  so 
much  acuteness,  one  so  much  a  philosopher  as  this  author, 
should,  with  such  formality,  make  a  distinction,  which  not  only 
the  essay,  but  the  whole  tenour  of  his  philosophical  writings, 
shows  evidently  to  have  no  meaning.  Is  that  which  is  con- 
trary to  experience  a  synonymous  phrase  for  that  which  im- 
plies a  contradiction  ?  If  this  were  the  case,  there  would  be 
no  need  to  recur  to  experience  for  a  refutation  ;  it  would  refute 
itself.  But  it  is  equitable  that  the  author  himself  be  heard, 
who   ought  to   be   the    best  interpreter  of  his  own  words. 

*  p. 179. 


Sect.  2.         PROOF  FROM  TESTIMONY.  41^ 

**  When  the  fact  attested,"  says  he,  ''  is  such  a  one,  as  has 
•*  seldom  lallen  under  our  observation,  here  is  a  contest  of  t\yo 
*'  opposite  experiences*."  In  this  passage,  not  the  being  never 
experienced,  but  even  the  being  seldom  experienced  constitutes 
an  opposite  experience.  I  can  conceive  no  way  but  one,  that 
the  author  can  evade  the  force  of  this  quotation  ;  and  that  is, 
by  obtruding  on  us,  some  new  distinction  between  an  opposite 
and  a  contrary  experience.  In  order  to  preclude  such  an  at- 
tempt, I  shall  once  more  recUr  to  his  own  authority.  "  It  is 
*'  no  miracle  that  a  man  in  seeming  good  health,  should  die  of 
*'  a  sudden."  Why  ?  "•  Because  such  a  kind  of  death,  though 
**  more  unusual  than  any  other,  hath  yet  been  frequently  ob- 
**  served  to  happen.  But  it  is  a  miracle  that  a  dead  man  should 
"  come  to  life."  Why?  Not  because  of  any  inconsistency  in 
the  thing.  That  a  body  should  be  this  hour  inanimate,  and 
the  next  animated,  is  no  more  inconsistent,  than  the  reverse 
that  it  should  be  this  hour  animated,  and  the  next  inanimate  ; 
though  the  one  be  common,  and  not.  the  other.  But  the  author 
himself  answers  the  question  :  *'  Because  that  has  never  been 
**  observed  in  any  age  or  countryj-."  Ail  the  contrariety  then 
that  there  is  in  miracles  to  experience,  doth,  by  his  own  con- 
cession, consist  solely  in  this,  that  they  have  never  been  ob- 
served ;  that  is,  they  are  not  conformable  to  experience.  To 
his  experience  personal  or  derived,  he  must  certainly  mean  j 
to  what  he  has  had  access  to  learn  of  different  ages  and  coun- 
tries. To  speak  beyond  the  knowledge  he  hath  attained, 
would  be  ridiculous.  It  would  be  first  supposing  a  miracle, 
and  then  inferring  a  contrary  experience,  instead  of  concluding 
from  experience,  that  the  fact  is  miraculous. 

Now,  I  insist,  that  as  far  as  regards  the  author's  argument, 
a  fact  perfectly  unusual,  or  not  conformable  to  our  experience, 
such  a  fact  as,  for  aught  we  have  had  access  to  learn,  was  ne- 
ver observed  in  any  age  or  country,  is  as  incapable  of  proof 
from  testimony,  as  miracles  are  ;  that,  if  this  writer  would 
argue  consistently,  he  could  never,  on  his  own  principles,  reject 
the  one  and  admit  the  other.  Both  ought  to  be  rejected  or 
neither.  I  would  not,  by  this  be  thought  to  signify,  that  there 
.  is  no  difference  between  a  miracle  and  an  extraordinary  event. 
I  know  that  the  former  implies  the  interposal  of  an  invisible 
agent,  which  is  not  implied  in  the  latter.  All  that  I  intend,  to 
assert  is,  that  the  author's  argument  equally  affects  them  both. 
Why  doth  such  interposal  appear  to  him  incredible  ?  Not 
from  any  incongruity  he  discerns  in  the  thing  itself.  He  doth 
not  pretend  it.     But  it  is  not  conformable  to  his  experience. 

*p.  17&,  tP-181. 


4§%  >|mAGL|:S  CAFABiLE  0^W^  Bart  I* 

**  A  miracle,"  says  he,  "■  is  a  transgression  o£  the  hiw  of  wi-t 
*'  ture*."  But  how  are  the  laws  oi  nature  known^  to  us  ?  ^y, 
experience.  What  is  the  criterion,  whereby  we  must  judge, 
i!S;hether  the  laws  of  nature  are  transgressed  ?  Solely  the  cock 
formity  or  disconformity  of  events  to  our  experience,  Thi% 
writer  surely  will  not  pretend,  that  we  can  have  apy  knowledge 
c^priori^  either  of  the  law,  or  of  the  violation. 

Let  us  then  examine  by  his  own  principles,  w.hether  tlA% 
I^ing  of  Siam,  of  whom  the  story  he  alludes  to,  is  related  bj? 
j^pckef,  could  have  sufficient  evidence  from  testimony,  of  a 
fact  so  contrary  to  his  experience  as  the  freezing  of  water. 
He  could  just  say  as  much  of  this  event,  as  the  author  can  say 
of  a  dead  man's  being  restored  to  life.  *  Such  a  thing  was 
'  never  observed,  as  far  as  I  could  learn,  in  any  age  or  coun-? 
^  try,*  If  the  things  themselves  too  are  impartially  considere.4; 
apd  independently  of  the  notions  acquired  by  us  in  the^- 
northern  climates,  we  should  account  the  first  at  least  as  extKs^i* 
pi;dinary  as  the  second.  That  so  pliant  a  body  as  water  shoul^i 
b/ecome  hard  like  pavement,  so  as  to  bear  up  an  elephant  on  it;% 
sprface,  is  as  unlikely  in  itself,  as  that  a  body  inanimate  to-da}5 
should  be  animated  to-morrow.  Nay,  to  the  Indian  monarcjti^ 
I  must  think,  that  the  first  would  appear  more  a  miracle,  mQre»x 
contrary  to  experience  than  the  second,  If  he  had  been  ap/sh 
quainted  with  ice  or  frozen  water,  and  afterwards  seen  it  b.e^ 
come  fluid  j  but  had  never  seen  nor  learned,  that  after  it  waj^v 
melted,  it  became  hard  again,  the  relation  must  have  appeared; 
marvellous,  as  die  process  from  fluidity  to  hardness  never  hja^ 
been  experienced,  though  the  reverse  often  had.  But  I  be,n. 
lieve  nobody  will  question,  that  on  this  supposition  it  woujy^ 
not  have  appeared  quite  so  strange,  as  it  did.  Yet  this  suppo- 
sition makes  the  instance  more  parallel  to  the  restoring  of  tho- 
dead  to  life.  The  process  from  animate  to  inanimate  we  are?, 
all  acquainted  with  ;  and  what  is  such  a  restoration,  but  the; 
reversing  of  this  process?  So  little  reason  had  the  author  tq. 
insinuate,  that  the  one  was  only  not  conformable^  the  other  cour- 
trary  to  experience.  If  there  be  a  difference  in  this  respect^, 
the  first  to  one  alike  unacquainted  with  both,  must  appear  the^^ 
niore  contrary  of  the  two. 

Does  it  alter  the  matter,  that  he  calls  the  former  "a  facti 
*'  which  arose  from  a  state  of  nature,  with  which  the  Indiagj, 
"  was  unacquainted  ?"  Was  not  such  a  state  quite  uncon^ 
formable,  or  (which  in  the  author's  language  I  have  shqwn  tar 
be  the  same)   contrary  to  his  experience?     Is  then  a  etste- of 

*  p.  182,  in  the  note. 

t  Essaj  on  human  underst^b^ding,  book  4.  ch2(p.S,§^. 


S*Q|^«.        PROOF  FROM  TESTIMONY.  42t 

i^atttr©  whkh  i&  coatrary  to  experience,  more  crediMe  th3m  atr 
saagle  fact  contrary  to  experience  ?  I  want  the  solution  of  on& 
fi'iMculty  :  I'he  author,  in  order  to  satisfy  me,  presents  vae- 
^vith  a  thousand  others.  Is  this  suitable  to  the  method  fe« 
paripposesi,  in  another  ^jlace,  of  admitting  always  the  less  mdra- 
cle  and  rejecting  the  greater*  ?  Is  it.  not,  on  the  coB,t3-ary,  adi- 
nftitting  without  any  dilficulty  the  greater  miracle,  and  thercbjfr 
re^moving  the  difficulty,  which  he  otherwise  would  have  had  ini 
ailmit'<jin.g  the  less  ?  Does  he  forget,  that  to  exhibit  a  state  q£ 
nature  entirely  different  from  what  we  experience  at  present^ 
is,  one  of  those  enormous  prodigies,  whicli,  in.  his-  account^i 
rqnder  th&  Pentateuch  unworthy  of  credit.-j- ?  "iNoi  Indian,'*" 
s^ys  hie  in  the  note,  "  it  is  evident,  could  have  experience  thajJ, 
*'  water  did  not  freeZtC  in  cold  climates.  This  is  placing  nature; 
*^in  a  situation  quite:  unknown  to  him, audit  is  impossible  for: 
^*  bim  to  tell  a  priariy  wh^t  will  result  from  it."  This  is  pre*- 
cisely,  as  if,  in  reply  to  the  author's  objection  from  experience 
against  the  raising  of  a  dead  man  (sjippose  Lazarus)  to  life,  I. 
should  retort:,  '  Neitlier  you,  Sir,  nor  any  who  live   in  this 

*  ce^ntury  can  have  experience,  that  a  dead  man  could  not  be; 

*  restored  to  life  at  the  command  of  one  divinely  commission- 

*  ed  to  give  a  revelation  to  men.     This  is  placing  nature  in  a 

*  situation  quite  unknown  to  you,  and  it  is  impossible  for  yovL 

*  to  tell  a  priori  what  will  result  from  it.  This  therefore  is  not' 
^  contrary  to  the  course  of  nature,  in  cases  where   all  the  cir- 

*  cumatances  are  the  same.     As  you  never  saw   one  vested 

*  with  such,  a  commission,  you  are  as  unexperienced,  as  igno- 
^  rant  of  this  point,  as  the  inhabitants  of  Sumatra  are  of  the 
^  frosts  in  Muscovy  ;  you  cannot  therefore  reasonably,  any 
*.more  than  they,  be  positive  as  to  the  consequences.'  Shoukl 
he  rejoin,  as- doubtless  he  would,  *  This  is  not  taking  away  the 

*  difficulty  ;  but,  like  the  elephant  and  the  tortoise,  in  the  ac- 
'  count  given  by  some  barbarians  of  the  manner  in  which  the 

*  earth  is  supported,  it  only  shifts  the  difficulty  a  step  further 
'  back.     My  objection  still  recurs.     That  any  man  should  be 

*  endowed  with   such  power  is   contrary  to  experience,  and. 

*  therefore  incredible  :'  Should  he,  I  say,  rejoin  in  this  man- 
ner, I  could  only  add,  '  Pray,  Sir,  revise  your  own  words  lately 

*  quoted,  and  consider  impartially  whether  they  be  not  as  glar- 
'  ingly  exposed  to  the  like  reply.'  For  my  part,  I  can  only 
perceive  one  difference  that  is  material  between  the  two  cases. 
You  frankly  confess,  that  with  regard  to  the  freezing  of  water^ 
besides  the  absolute  want  of  experience,  there  would  be  from 
artalogj^  a.  presumption  against  it,  which  ought  to  weigh  with  a 

*  p.  182;  t  p.  306. 


422  MIRACLES  CAPABLE  OF  Parti, 

rational  Indian.  I  think,  on  the  contrary,  in  the  case  supposed 
by  me  of  one  commissioned  by  Heaven,  there  is  at  least  no 
presumption  against  the  exertion  of  such  a  miraculous  power. 
There  is  rather  a  presumption  in  its  favour. 

Does  the  author  then  say,  that  no  testimony  could  give  the 
King  of  Siam  sufficient  evidence  of  the  effects  of  cold  on  wa- 
ter ?  No.  By  implication  he  says  the  contrary:  "  It  required 
very  strong  testimony."  Will  he  say,  that  those  most  aston- 
ishing effects  of  electricity  lately  discovered,  so  entirely  un- 
analogous  to  every  thing  before  experienced,  will  he  sa}',  that 
such  facts  no  reasonable  man  could  have  sufficient  evidence 
from  testimony  to  believe  ?  No.  We  may  presume,  he  will 
not,  from  his  decision  in  the  former  case  ;  and  if  he  should, 
the  common  sense  of  mankind  would  reclaim  against  his  ex- 
travagance. Yet  it  is  obvious  to  every  considerate  reader,  that 
his  argument  concludes  equally  against  those  truly  marvellous, 
as  against  miraculous  events  ;  both  being  alike  unconformable, 
or  alike  contrary  to  former  experience*. 

Thus  I  think  I  have  shown,  that  the  author  is  chargeable 
with  some  fallacies,  in  his  way  of  managing  the  argument  j 

*  1  cannot  forbear  to  observe,  that  many  of  the  principal  terms  employed  in 
the  essay,  are  used  in  a  manner  extremely  vague  and  unphilosophical.  I  have  re- 
marked the  confusion  I  find  in  the  application  of  the  words,  experience,  contrarie- 
ty,  conformity :  I  might  remark  tlie  same  thing  of  the  word,  miracle.  "  A  mira- 
**  cle,"  It  issai'l,  p.  182,  in  the  note,  "  may  be  accuratelv  defined,  a  tkaxsgkes- 
*'  sio_^  of  a  la\u  of  nature,  l>y  a  particular  volition  of  the  Deity,  or  by  the  interpoaul  of 
"  some  invisible  agent."  The  w  rU  transgression  invariably  denotes  a'cri  ;U  ai  op- 
position to  authority.  The  author's  accuracy  in  representing  God  as  a  transgres- 
sor, I  have  not  the  perspicacity  to  discern.  Does  he  intend,  by  throw n.g  some- 
thing monstrous  into  the  definition,  to  infuse  into  the  reader  a  prejudice  against 
the  thing  defined?  But  supposing  that  through  inadvertency,  he  had  used  the 
term  transgression,  instead  '>f  suspension,  which  would  have  been  both  intelh^^ible 
and  proper ;  one  would  at  least  expect,  tha'  the  word  miracle  in  the  essay,  al- 
ways exprest  the  sense  of  the  definition.  B  r  this  it  evidently  does  not.  Tnus 
in  the  instance  of  the  miracle  supposed  (p  203,  in  the  note)  he  calls  it,  iii  the 
beginning  of  the  paragraph,  "  A  violation  of  the  usual  c  urse  of  nature  ;"  but 
in  the  end,  after  telling  us  that  such  a  miracle,  on  the  evide-ice  supposed,  "  our 
"present  philosopiiers  ought  to  receive  for  certain,"  he  subjoi' s,  (how  consist- 
ently, let  the  reader  judge)  "  and  ought  to  search  for  the  causes,  whence  it  might 
••  be  derived."  Thus  it  is  insinuated,  that  though  a  fact  apparently  miraculous, 
and  perfectly  extraordinary,  might  be  admitted  by  a  philosopher,  stid  the  reality 
of  the  miracle  must  be  denied.  For  if  the  interposal  of  the  Deity  be  the  pro- 
per solution  of  the  phenomenon,  why  should  we  recur  to  natural  causes  ?  Hence 
a  careless  reader  is  insensibly  led  to  think  that  there  is  some  special  incredibility 
in  such  an  interposal,  distinct  from  its  uncommonness.  Yet  the  author's  great 
argument  is  built  on  this  single  circumstance,  and  places  such  an  interposition 
just  on  the  same  footing  wirh  every  event  that  is  equally  uncommon.  Atone 
time,  he  uses  the  word  miracle  to  denote  a  bare  improbability,  as  will  appear 
in  the  sixth  section  :  at  another,  absurd  and  viiraculous  are,  with  him,  synony- 
mous terms ;  so  are  also  the  miraculous  nature  of  an  event,  and  its  absolutt 
impossibility.    Is  this  the  style  and  manner  of  a  reason?!? 


Sect.  S.  PROOF  FROM  TESTIMONY. 

that  he  all  along  avails  himself  of  an  ambiguity  in  the  word 

experience  ; that  his  reasoning  includes  a  petitio  principii  ia 

the  bosom  of  it ; and  that,  in  supporting  his  argument,  he 

must  have  recourse  to  distinctions,  where,  even  himself  being 
judge,  there  is  no  difference. 


SECTION  III. 

Mr»  Hume  himself  gives  up  his  favourite  argument. 

JVaR.  Hume  himself,'  methinks  I  hear  my  reader  repeating 
with  astonishment,  '  gives  up  his  favourite  argument?  To 
*  prove  this  point  is  indeed  a  very  bold  attempt.'  Yet  that 
this  attempt  is  not  altogether  so  arduous,  as  at  first  hearing, 
Ke  will  possibly  imagine,  I  hope,  if  favoured,  a  while  with 
his  attention,  fully  to  convince  him.  If  to  acknowledge,  af- 
ter all,  that  there  may  be  miracles,  which  admit  of  proof  from, 
iiuman  testimony;  if. to  acknowledge,  that  such  miracles 
ought  to  be  received,  not  as  probable  only,  but  as  absolutely 
certain  ;  or,  in  other  words,  that  the  proof  from  human  tes- 
timony may  be  such  as  that  all  the  contrary  uniform  experience, 
should  not  only-  be  overbalanced,  but,  to  use  the  author's  ex- 
pression, should  be  annihilated  ;  if  such  acknowledgments  as 
these,  are  subversive  of  his  own  principles  ;  if  by  making 
them,  he  abandons  his  darling  argument ;  this  strange  part 
the  essayist  evidently  acts. 

"  I  own,"  these  are  his  words,  '*  there  may  possibly  be 
**  miracles,  or  violations  of  the  usual  course  of  nature,  of  such 
*'  a  kind  as  to  admit  a  proof  from  human  testimony,  though 
"  perhaps"  (in  this  he  is  modest  enough,  he  avers  nothing ; 
perhaps)  *'  it  will  be  impossible  to  find  any  such  in  all  the  re- 
"  cords  of  history."  To  this  declaration  he  subjoins  the  fol- 
lowing supposition  :  ''  Suppose  all  authors,  in  all  languages, 
*'  agree,  that  from  the  1st  of  January  1700,  there  was  a  total 
*'  darkness  over  the  whole  earth  for  eight  days  ;  suppose  that 
*'  the  tradition  of  this  extraordinary  event,  is  still  strong  and 
*'  lively  among  the  people  ;  that  all  travellers,  who  retura 
*'  from  foreign  countries,  bring  us  accounts  of  the  same  tra- 
*'  dition,  without  the  least  variation  or  contradiction  :  it  is 
*'  evident,  that  our  present  philosophers,  instead  of  doubting 
*'  of  that  fact,  ought  to  receive  it  for  certain,  and  ought  to 
**  search  for  the  causes,  whence  it  might  be  derived*.'* 

•p.  208,  in th^ note. 


424  MIRACLES  CAPABLE  6V  iPart  t* 

Could  one  imagine,  that  the  person  who  had  made  the  above 
acknowledgment,  a  person  too  who  is  justly  allowed  by  all 
who  are  acquainted  with  his  writings,  to  possess  uncommtJh 
penetration  and  philosophical  abilities,  that  this  were  the  same 
individual,  who  had  so  short  while  before  affirmed,  that  **  u. 
miracle,"  or  a  violation  of  the  usual  course  of  nature,  "  sup- 
*'  ported  by  any  human  testimony,  is  more  properly  a  subject 
"  of  derision  than  of  argument*  ;'*  who  had  insisted,  that 
*'  it  is  not  requisite,  in  order  to  reject  the  fact,  to  be  able  ac- 
"  curately  to  disprove  the  testimonv,  and  to  trace  its  false- 
*'  hood  ;  that  such  an  evidence  carries  falsehood  on  the  very 
"  face  of  itj-;"  that  "  we  need  but  oppose  even  to  a  cloud  of 
"witnesses,  the  absolute  impossibility,  or,"  which  iS  all  one, 
*'  miraculous  nature  of  the  events,  which  they  relate  ;  that 
**  this  in  the  eyes  of  all  reasonable  people,  will  alone  be  re- 
"  garded  as  a  sufficient  refutation^;"  and  who  finally  to  put  ati 
end  to  all  altercation  on  the  subject  had  pronounced  this  oracle, 
**  No  TESTIMONY   FOR  ANY  KIND    OF   MIRACLE    can 

"  EVER   POSSIBLY   AMOUNT  TO  A  PROBABILITY,    MUCH  LESS  TO 

'*  A  PROOF  ."  Was  there  ever  a  more  glaring  contradiction ! 
Yet  for  the  event  supposed  by  the  essayist,  the  testimony, 
in  his  judgment,  would  amount  to  2l  probability  ;  nay  to  more 
than  a  probability,  to  2l  proof ;  let  not  the  reader  be  astonished^ 
or  if  he  cannot  fail  to  be  astonished,  let  him  not  be  incredulous, 
when  I  add,  to  more  than  a  proofs  more  than  a  full,  entire  and 
direct  proof;  for  even  this  I  hope  to  make  evident  from  the 
author's  principles  and  reasoning.  *'  And  even  supposing,*' 
says  he,  that  is,  granting  for  argument's  sake,  "  that  the  testi- 
*'  mony  for  a  miracle  amounted  to  a  proof,  it  would  be  opposed 
**  by  another  proof,  derived  from  the  very  nature  of  the  fact, 
"  which  it  would  endeavour  to  establish**."  Here  is  then, 
by  his  own  reasoning,  proof  against  proof,  from  which  there 
could  result  no  belief  or  opinion,  unless  the  one  is  conceived 
to  be  in  some  degree  superiour  to  the  other.  "  Of  which 
"  proofs,"  says  he,  "  the  strongest  must  prevail,  but  still  with 
"  a  diminution  of  its  force  in  proportion  to  that  of  its  antago- 
"  nist.j-j-"  Before  the  author  could  believe  such  a  miracle  as 
he  supposes,  he  must  at  least  be  satisfied  that  the  proof  of  it 
from  testimony  is  stronger  than  the  proof  against  it  from  ex- 
perience. That  we  may  form  an  accurate  judgment  of  the 
strength  he  here  ascribes  to  testimony,  let  us  consider  what, 
by  his  own  account,  is  the  strength  of  the  opposite  proof  from 
experience.  *•'  A  miracle  is  a  violation  of  the  laws  of  nature  ; 
**  and  as  a  firm  and  unalterable  experience  has  established 

•  pw  194.        t  ib.        {  p.  196,  &c.        ||  p.  203.        •*  ib.        ft  P-  180. 


qe9t.3.         PROOF  FROM  TESTIMONY.  42S 

•'  these  laws,  the  proof  against  a  miracle,  from  the  very  nature 
*:*■  of  the  fact,  is  as  e/jfzVt?,  as  any  argument  from  experience 
"'can  possibly  be  imagined*."  Again,  "  As  an  uniform  ex- 
"  perience  amounts  to  a  proof,  there  is  here  a  direct  and  full 
"  proof,  from  the  nature  of  the  fact,  against  the  existence  of 
**•  any  miraclej-."  The  proof  then  which  the  essayist  admits 
from  testiinony,  is,  by  his  own  estimate,  not  only  superiour  to 
a  direct  iwidjull  proof;  but  even  superiour  to  as  entire  a  proof, 
as  any  argument  from  experience  can  possibly  be  imagined. 
Whence,  I  pray,  doth  testimony  acquire  such  amazing  evi- 
dence ?  *  Testintony,'  says  the  author,  '  hath  no  evidence,  but  ' 
''what  it  derives  from  experience.  These  differ  from  each' 
*  other  only  as  the  species  from  the  genus.'  Put  then  for  tes- 
timony^ the  word  experience^  which  in  this  case  is  equivalent, 
and  the  conclusion  will  run  thus  :  Here  is  a  proof  from  experi- 
ence^ -which  is  superiour  to  as  entire  a  proof  from  experience  as 
can  possibly  be  imagined.  This  deduction  from  the  author's 
words,  the  reader  will  perceive,  is  strictly  logical.  What  the 
meaning  of  it  is,  I  leave  Mr.  Hume  to  explain. 

What  hath  been  above  deduced,  how  much  soever  it  be  ac- 
counted, is  not  all  that  is  implied  in  the  concession  made  by 
the  author.  He  further  says,  that  the  miraculous  fact  so  at- 
tested, ought  not  only  to  be  received,  but  to  be  received  for 
certain.  Is  it  not  enough,  Sir,  that  you  have  shown  that  your 
most  full,  most  direct,  most  perfect  argument  may  be  over- 
come ;  will  nothing  satisfy  you  now  but  its  destruction  ?  One 
would  imagine,  that  you  had  conjured  up  this  demon,  by 
whose  irresistible  arm  you  proposed  to  give  a  mortal  blow  to 
religion,  and  render  scepticism  triumphant,  (that  you  had  con- 
jured him  up,  I  say)  for  no  other  purpose,  but  to  show  with 
what  facility  you  could  lay  him.  To  be  serious,  does  not  this 
author  remember,  that  he  had  oftener  than  once  laid  it  down 
as  a  maxim,  That  when  there  is  proof  against  proof,  we  must 
incline  to  the  superiour,  still  with  a  diminution  of  assurance, 
in  proportion  to  the  force  of  its  antagonist!  ?  But  when  a  fact 
is  received  ybr  certain^  there  can  be  no  sensible  diminution  of 
assurance,  such  diminution  always  implying  some  doubt  and 
uncertainty.  Consequently  the  general  proof  from  experience, 
though  as  entire  as  any  argument  from  experience  can  possi- 
bly be  imagined,  is  not  only  surmounted,  but  is  really  in  com- 
parison as  nothing,  or,  in  Mr.  Hume's  phrase,  undergoes  an- 
nihilation, when  balanced  with  the  particular  proof  from  testi- 
mony. Great  indeed,  it  must  be  acknowledged  is  the  force  of 
truth.     This  conclusion,  on  the  principles  I  have  been  endea- 

*  p.  180.  t  P-  181.  t  P-  178.  180. 

Hhh 


426  MIRACLES  CAPABLE  OF  Part  L 

vouring  to  establish,  has  nothing  in  it,  but  what  is  conceivable 
and  just;  but  on  the  principles  of  the  essay,  which  deduce  all 
the  force  of  testimony  from  experience,  serves  only  to  con- 
found the  understanding,  and  to  involve  the  subject  in  mid- 
night darkness. 

It  is  therefore  manifest,  that  either  this  author's  principles 
condemn  his  ovm  method  of  judging,  with  regard  to  miracu- 
lous facts  ;  or  that  his  method  of  judging  subverts  his  princi- 
ples, and  is  a  tacit  desertion  of  them.  Thus  that  impregnable 
fortress,  the  asylum  of  infidelity,  which  he  so  lately  gloried  in 
having  erected,  is  in  a  moment  abandoned  by  him,  as  a  place 
untenable. 


SECTION  IV. 

There  h  no  peculiar  presumption  against  such  miracles  as  are 
said  to  have  been  wrought  in  support  of  religion. 


I 


-S  it  then  so,  that  the  decisive  argument,  the  essayist  flatter- 
ed himself  he  had  discovered*,  which  with  the  wise  and 
learned,  was  to  prove  an  everlasting  check  to  all  kinds  of  su- 
perstitious delusion,  and  would  consequently  be  useful,  as 
long  as  the  world  endures  ;  is  it  so,  that  this  boasted  argument 
hath  in  fact  little  or  no  influence  on  the  discoverer  himself! 
But  this  author 'may  well  be  excused.  He  cannot  be  always 
the  metaphysician.  He  cannot  soar  incessantly  in  the  clouds. 
Such  constant  elevation  suits  not  the  lot  of  humanity.  He 
must  sometimes,  whether  he  will  or  not,  descend  to  a  level 
with  other  people,  and  fall  into  the  humble  track  of  common 
sense.  One  thing  however  he  is  resolved  on :  If  he  cannot 
by  metaphj'sick  spells  silence  the  most  arrogant  bigotry  and 
superstition  ;  he  will  at  any  rate,  though  for  this  purpose  he 
should  borrow  aid  from  what  he  hath  no  liking  to,  trite  and 
popular  topicks  ;  he  will  at  any  rate  free  himself  from  their 
impertinent  solicitations. 

There  are  accordingly  two  principles  in  human  nature,  by 
which  he  accounts  for  all  the  relations,  that  have  ever  been  in 
the  world,  concerning  miracles.  These  principles  are,  the 
passion  for  the  marvellous^  and  the  religious  affection^  •■,  against 
either  of  which  singly,  the  philosopher,  he  says,  ought  ever  to 
be  on  his  guard ;  but  incomparably  more  so,  when  both  hap- 
pen to  be  in  strict  confederacy  together.  "  For  if  the  spirit 
"  of  religion  join  itself  to  the  love  of  wonder,  there  is  an  end 

*  p.  174;     .       t  p.  16'i.  185. 


Sect.  4.  PROOF  FROM  TESTIMONY.  427 

"  of  common  sense  ;  and  human  testimony,  in  these  circum- 
*'  stances,  loses  all  pretensions  to  authority.*"  Notwithstand- 
ing this  strong  affirmation,  there  is  reason  to  suspect  that  the 
author  is  not  in  his  heart,  so  great  an  enemy  to  the  love  ol 
wonder,  as  he  affects  to  appear.  No  man  can  make  a  greater 
concession  in  favour  of  the  wonderful,  than  he  hath  done  in 
the  passage  quoted  in  the  preceding  section.  No  man  was 
ever  fonder  of  paradox,  and,  in  theoretical  subjects,  of  every 
notion  that  is  remote  from  sentiments  universally  received. 
This  love  of  paradox,  he  owns  himself,  that  both  his  enemies 
and  his  friends  reproach  him  withf.  There  must  surely  be 
some  foundation  for  so  universal  a  censure.  If  therefore,  in 
respect  of  the  passion  for  the  marvellous,  he  differs  from  other 
people,  the  difference  ariseth  from  a  particular  delicacv  in  this 
gentleman,  which  makes  him  nauseate  even  to  wonder  with 
the  crowd.  He  is  of  that  singular  turn  that  where  evei-y  body 
is  struck  with  astonishment,  he  can  see  nothing  wondrous  in 
the  least ;  at  the  same  time  he  discovers  prodigies,  where  no 
soul  but  himself  ever  dreamt  that  there  were  any. 

We  may  therefore  rest  assured  of  it,  that  the  author  might 
be  conciliated  to  the  love  of  -wonder^  provided  the  spirit  of  re- 
ligion be  kept  at  a  distance,  against  which  he  hath  unluckily 
contracted  a  mortal  antipathy,  against  which  he  has  resolved 
to  wage  eternal  war.  When  he  but  touches  this  subject,  he 
loseth  at  once  his  philosophick  composure,  and  speaks  with  an 
acrimony  unusual  to  him  on  other  occasions.  Something  of 
this  kind  appears  from  the  citations  already  made.  But  if 
these  should  not  satisfy,  I  shall  produce  one  or  two  more, 
which  certainly  will.  There  is  a  second  supposition  the  au- 
thor makes  of  a  miraculous  event,  in  a  certain  manner  cir- 
cumstanced and  attested,  which  he  declares,  and  I  think  with 
particular  propriety,  that  he  would  "  not  have  the  least  indi- 
"  nation  to  believej."  At  his  want  of  inclination  the  reader 
will  not  be  surprised,  when  he  learns  that  this  supposed  mira- 
cle is  concerning  a  resurrection ;  an  event  which  bears  too 
strong  a  resemblance  both  to  the  doctrine  and  to  the  miracles 
of  holy  writ,  not  to  alarm  a  modern  Pyrrhonist.  To  the  above 
declaration  he  subjoins,  "  But  should  this  miracle  be  ascribed 
**  to  any  new  system  of  religion,  men  in  all  ages  have  been  so 
*'  much  imposed  on  by  ridiculous  stories  of  that  kind,  that  this 
"  verycircumstancewoaldbeafullproof  of  acheat,and  sufficient 
*'  with  all  men  of  sense,  not  only  to  make  them  reject  the  fact, 
''  but  even  reject  it  ivithout  further  examination^'''  Again,  a 
little  after,  "  As  the  violations  of  truth  are  more  common  in 

*  p,  164. 185,     +  Dedication  to  the  four  disEertalions.     \  p.  204.  in  tiie  note. 


42«  MIRACLES  CAPABLE  OF  Part  I. 

"  the  testimony  concerning  religious  miracles,  than  in  that 
*'  concerning  any  other  matter  of  fact,"  (a  point  which  the  au- 
thor is  positive,  though  lie  neither  produceth  facts  nor  argu- 
ments to  support  it)  "•  this  must  diminish  ver);  much  the  au- 
*'  thority  of  the  former  testimony,  and"  (pray  observe  his 
words)  "  make  us  form  a  general  resolution,  7iever  to  lend,, 
*'  any  attention  to  it,  xvith  ivhatever  specious  pretext  it  may  biS 
*'  covered.'''' 

Never  did  the  passion  of  an  inflamed  orator,  or  the  intem- 
perate zeal  of  a  religionist,  carry  him  further  against  his  ad- 
versary, than  this  man  of  speculation  is  carried  by  his  preju- 
dice against  religion.  Demagogues  and  bigots  have  often 
warned  the  people  against  listening  to  the  arguments  of  an 
envied  and  therefore  detested  rival,  lest  by  his  sophistry  they 
should  be  seduced  into  the  most  fatal  errours.  The  same  part 
this  author,  a  philosopher,  a  sceptick,  a  dispassionate  inquirer 
after  truth,  as  surely  he  chooseth,  to  be  accounted,  now  acts  ia 
favour  of  infidelity.  He  thinks  it  not  safe  to  give  religion 
even  a  hearing.  Nay  so  strange  a  turn  have  matters  taken  of 
late  with  the  managers  of  this  controversy,  that  it  is  now  the 
TREETHiNKER  who  preaches  implicit  faith  ;  it  is  the  infidel, 
who  warns  us  of  the  danger  of  consulting  reason.  Beware, 
says  he,  I  admonish  you,  of  inquiring  into  the  strength  of  the 
plea,  or  of  bringing  it  to  the  deceitful  test  of  reason  ;  for 
*'  those  who  will  be  so  silly  as  to  examine  the  affair  by  that 
*'  medium,  and  seek,  particular  flaws  in  the  testimony,  are  al- 
*'  most  sure  to  be  confounded*."  That  religion  is  concerned 
in  the  matter,  is. reckoned  by  these  sages  sufficient  evidence  of 
imposture.  The  proofs  she  offers  in  her  own  defence,  we  are 
told  by  these  candid  judges,  ought  to  be  rejected,  and  rejected 
without  examination.  The  old  way  of  scrutiny  and  argument 
must  now  be  laid  aside,  having  been  at  length  discovered  to 
be  but  a  bungling,  a  tedious,  and  a  dangerous  way  at  best. 
What  then  shall  we  substitute  in  its  place  ?  The  essayist  hath 
a  most  admirable  expedient.  A  shorter  and  surer  method  he 
recommends  to  us,  the  expeditious  way  oi  resolution.  '  Form,' 
says  he,  *  a  general  resolution,  never  to  lend  any  attention 
*  to  testimonies  or  facts,  urged  by  religion,  -with  whatever  spe- 
'  cious  pretext  they  may  he  c-overed.'' 

I  had  almost  congratulated  Mr.  Hume,  and  our  enlightened 
age^  on  this  happy  invention,  before  I  reflected,  that  though 
the  application  might  be  new,  the  expedient  itself,  of  resolv- 
ing to  be  deaf  to  argument,  was  very  ancient,  having  been 
often  with  great  success  employed  against  atheists  and  here- 

•  p.  197.  ir.  tlie  note. 


Sect.  4.  PROOF  FROM  TESTIMONY.  429 

ticks,  and  warmly  recommended  by  Bellarmine  and  Seotus, 
and  most  others  of  that  bright  fraternity  the  schoolmen  :  Per- 
sons, I  acknowledge,  to  whom  one  could  not,  perhaps  in  any 
other  instance,  find  a  resemblance  in  my  ingenious  opponent. 
I  am  afraid  that  after  such  a  declaration,  I  must  not  presume 
to  consider  myself  as  arguing  with  the  author,  who  haih,  in  so 
peremptory  a  manner,  resolved  to  attend  to  nothing  that  can 
be  said  in  opposition  to  his  theory.  '  What  judgment  he  has,' 
to  use  his  own  expression,  *  he  has  renounced  by  principle,  in 
'  these  sublime  and  mysterious  subjects*.'  If  however  it  should 
prove  the  fate  of  these  papers,  the  forbidding  title  of  them 
notwithstanding,  to  be  at  any  time  honoured  with  the  perusal 
of  some  infidel,  not  indeed  so  rivetted  in  unbelief  as  the  es- 
sayist, I  would  earnestly  intreat  such  reader,  in  the  solemn 
style  of  Mr.  Hume,  "  To  lay  his  hand  upon  his  heart,  and 
"  after  serious  consideration  declaref ,"  If  any  of  the  patrons 
of  religion  had  acted  this  part,  and  warned  people  not  to  try 
by  argument  the  metaphysical  subtleties  of  the  adversaries, 
affirming,  that  '  they  who  were  mad  enough  to  examine  the 
'  affair  by  that  medium,  and  seek  particular  flaws  in  the  rea- 
*•  soning^  were   almost  sure  to  be  confounded  ;  that  the  only 

*  prudent  method  was,  to  form  a  general  resolution,  never 

*  to  lend  any  attention  to  what  was  advanced  on  the  opposite 
*•  side,  however  specious;^  whether  this  conduct  would  not  have 
afforded  great  matter  of  triumph  to  those  gentlemen  the  de- 
ists; whether  it  would  not  have  been  construed  by  them,  and 
even  justly,  into  a  tacit  conviction  of  the  weakness  of  our 
cause,  which  we  were  afraid  of  exposing  in  the  light,  and 
bringing  to  a  fair  trial.  But  we  scorn  to  take  shelter  in  ob- 
scurity, and  meanly  to  decline  the  combat ;  confident  as  we  are, 
that  REASON  is  our  ally  and  our  friend.,  and  glad  to  find  that 
the  enemy  at  length  so  violently  suspects  her. 

As  to  the  first  method,  by  which  the  author  accounts  for  the 
fabulous  relations  of  monsters  and  prodigies,  it  is  freely  ac- 
knowledged, that  the  Creator  hath  implanted  in  human  nature, 
as  a  spur  to  the  improvement  of  the  understanding,  a  princi- 
ple of  curiosity^  which  makes  the  mind  feel  a  particular  plea- 
sure in  every  new  acquisition  of  knowledge.  It  is  acknow- 
ledged also,  that  as  every  principle  in  our  nature  is  liable  to 
abuse,  so  this  principle  will  often  give  the  mind  a  bias  to  the 
marvellous,  for  the  more  marvellous  any  thing  is,  that  is,  the 
more  unlike  to  all  that  hath  formerly  been  known,  the  more 
new  it  is  ;  and  this  bias,Jn  many  instances,  may  induce  belief 
on  insufficient  evidence. 

*  p.  185.  t  P-  206. 


430  MIRACLES  CAPABLE  OF  iPart  L 

But  the  presumption  that  hence  ariseth  against  the  marvel- 
lous is  not  stronger  in  the  case  of  miracles  (as  will  appear  from 
an  attentive  perusal  of  the  second  section)  than  in  the  case  of 
every  fact  that  is  perfectly  extraordinary.  Yet  how  easily  this 
obstacle  may  be  overcome  by  testimony,  might  be  illustrated, 
if  necessary,  in  almost  every  branch  of  science,  in  physiolo- 
gy, in  geography,  in  history.  On  the  contrary,  what  an  im- 
mense impediment  would  this  presumption  prove  to  the  pro- 
gress of  philosophy  and  letters,  had  it  in  reality  one  fiftieth- 
part  of  the  strength  which  the  author  seems  to  attribute  to  it. 
I  shall  not  tire  my  reader  or  myself  by  recurring  to  the  philo- 
sophick  wonders,  in  electricity,  chymistry,  magnetism,  which, 
all  the  world  sees,  may  be  fully  proved  to  us  by  testimony,  be- 
fore we  make  the  experiments  ourselves. 

But  there  is,  it  seems,  additional  to  this,  a  peculiar  pre- 
sumption against  religious  miracles.  "  The  wise,"  as  the  au- 
thor hath  observed  with  reason,  *'  lend  a  very  academick  faith 
*'  to  every  report,  which  favours  the  passion  of  the  reporter, 
"  whether  it  magnifies  his  country,  his  family,  or  himself,  or 
**  in  any  other  way  strikes  in  v/ith  his  natural  inclinations  and 
"  propensities*."  Now,  as  no  object  whatever  operates  more 
powerfully  on  the  fancy  than  religion  does,  or  works  up  the 
passions  to  a  higher  fervour  ;  so,  in  matters  relating  to  this 
subject,  if  in  any  subject,  we  have  reason  to  suspect  that  the 
understanding  will  prove  a  dupe  to  the  passions.  On  this 
point  therefore  we  ought  to  be  peculiarly  cautious,  that  we  be 
not  hasty  of  belief.     In  this  sentiment  we  all  agree. 

But  there  is  one  circumstance,  which  he  hath  overlooked, 
and  which  is  nevertheless  of  the  greatest  consequence  in  the 
debate.  It  is  this,  that  the  prejudice  resulting  from  the  reli- 
gious affection,  may  just  as  readily  obstruct^  as  promote  our 
faith  in  a  religious  miracle.  What  things  in  nature  are  more 
contrary,  than  one  religion  is  to  another  religion  ?  They  are 
just  as  contrary  as  light  and  darkness,  truth  and  errour.  The 
affections,  with  which  they  are  contemplated  by  the  same  per- 
son, are  just  as  opposite,  as  desire  and  aversion,  love  and  ha- 
tred. The  same  religious  zeal  which  gives  the  mind  of  a 
Christian,  a  propensity  to  the  belief  of  a  miracle  in  support 
of  Christianity,  will  inspire  him  with  an  aversion  from  the  be- 
lief of  a  miracle  in  support  of  Mahometism.  The  same  prin- 
ciple, which  will  make  him  acquiesce  in  evidence  lesa  than  suf- 
ficient in  the  one  case,  will  make  him  require  evidence  more 
than  sufficient  in  the  other. 

*p.  200. 


Sect.  4.  PROOF  FROM  TESTIMONY.  431 

Before  then  the  remark  of  the  author  can  be  of  any  use  in 
directing  our  judgment,  as  to  the  evidence  of  miracles  at- 
tested, we  must  consider  whether  the  original  tenets  of  the 
witnesses  would  naturally  have  biassed  their  minds  in  favour 
of  the  miracles,  or  in  opposition  to  them.  If  the  former  was 
the  case,  the  testimony  is  so  much  the  less  to  be  regarded  ;  if 
the  latter,  so  much  the  more.  Will  it  satisfy  on  this  head  to 
acquaint  us,  that  the  prejudices  of  the  witnesses  must  have 
favoured  the  miracles,  since  they  were  zealous  promoters  of 
the  doctrine,  in  support  of  which  those  miracles  are  said  to 
hare  b^en  performed  ?  To  answer  thus  would  be  to  misunder- 
stand the  point.  The  question  is.  Was  this  doctrine  the  faith 
of  the  witnesses,  before  they  saw,  or  fancied  they  saw  the  mi- 
racles ?  If  it  was,  I  agree  with  him.  Great,  very  great  al- 
lowance must  be  made  for  the  prejudices  of  education,  fof 
principles,  early  perhaps,  cai'efuUy,  and  deeply  rooted  in  their 
minds,  and  for  the  religious  aifection  founded  in  these  princi- 
ples ;  which  allowance  must  always  derogate  from  the  weight 
of  their  testimony.  But  if  the  faith  of  the  witnesses  stood 
originally  in  opposition  to  the  doctrine  attested  by  the  mira- 
cles ;  if  the  only  account  that  can  be  given  of  their  conver- 
sion, is  the  conviction  which  the  miracles  produced  in  them  ;  it 
must  be  a  preposterous  way  of  arguing,  to  derive  their  con- 
viction from  a  religious  zeal,  %vhich  would  at  first  obstinately 
withstand,  and  for  some  time  hinder  such  conviction.  On  the 
contrary,  that  the  evidence  arising  from  miracles  performed 
in  proof  of  a  doctrine  disbelieved,  and  consequently  hated  be- 
fore, did  in  fact  surmount  that  obstacle,  and  conquer  all  the 
opposition  arising  thence,  is  a  very  strong  presumption  in  fa- 
vour of  that  evidence  :  just  as  strong  a  presumption  in  its  fa- 
vour, as  it  would  have  been  against  it,  had  all  their  former 
zeal,  and  principles,  and  prejudices,  co-operated  with  the  evi- 
dence, whatever  it  was,  in  gaining  an  entire  assent. 

Hence  there  is  the  greatest  disparity  in  this  respect,  a  dis- 
parity which  deserves  to  be  particularly  attended  to,  betwixt 
the  evidence  of  miracles  performed  in  proof  of  a  religion  to 
be  established,  and  in  contradiction  to  opinions  generally  re- 
ceived ;  and  the  evidence  of  miracles  performed  in  support  of 
a  religion  already  established,  and  in  conjirmation  of  opinions 
generally  received.  Hence  also  the  greatest  disparity  betwixt 
the  miracles  recorded  by  the  evangelists,  and  those  related  by 
Mariana,  Bede,  or  anv  monkish  historian. 

There  is  then  no  peculiar  presumption  against  religious  mi- 
racles merely  as  such ;  if  in  certain  circumstances  there  is  a 
presumption  against  them  ;  the  presumption  ariseth  solely 
from  the  circumstances,  insomuch  that,  in  the  opposite  .cir- 
cumstances, it  is  as  strongly  in  their  favour. 


432  MIRACLES  CAPABLE  OF  Part  I. 


SECTION  V. 

There  is  a  peculiar  presumption  In  favour  of  such  miracles  as 
are  said  to  have  been  wrought  in  support  of  religion. 

xN  this  section  I  propose  to  consider  the  reverse  of  the  ques- 
tion treated  in  the  former.  In  the  former  I  proved  that  there 
is  no  peculiar  presumption  against  religious  miracles  ;  I  now 
inquire  whether  there  be  any  in  their  favour.  The  question  is 
important,  and  intimately  connected  with  the  subject. 

The  boldest  iniidel  will  not  deny,  that  the  immortality  of 
the  soul,  a  future  and  eternal  state,  and  the  connexion  of  our 
happiness  or  misery  in  that  state,  with  our  present  good  or  bad 
conduct,  not  to  mention  the  doctrines  concerning  the  divine 
unity -and  perfections,  are  tenets  which  carry  no  absurdity  in 
them.  They  may  be  true  for  aught  he  knows.  He  disbelieves 
them,  not  because  they  are  incredible  in  themselves,  but  be- 
cause he  hath  not  evidence  of  their  truth.  He  pretends  not 
to  disprove  them,  nor  does  he  think  the  task  incumbent  on 
him.  He  only  pleads,  that  before  he  can  yield  them  his  assent, 
they  must  be  proved. 

Now,  as  whatever  is  possible,  may  be  supposed,  let  us  sup- 
pose that  the  dogmas  above-mentioned  are  all  infallible  truths  ; 
and  let  the  unbeliever  say,  whether  he  can  conceive  an  object 
worthier  of  the  Divine  interposal,  than  to  reveal  these  truths 
to  mankind  ?  and  to  enforce  them  in  such  a  manner,  as  may 
give  them  a  suitable  influence  on  the  heart  and  life.  Of  all 
the  inhabitants  of  the  earth,  man  is  incomparably  the  noblest. 
Whatever  therefore  regards  the  interest  of  the  human  species, 
is  a  grander  concern,  than  what  regards  either  the  inanimate 
or  the  brute  creation.  If  man  was  made,  as  is  doubtless  not 
impossible,  for  an  after  state  of  immortality  ;  whatever  relates 
to  that  immortal  state,  or  may  conduce  to  prepare  him  for  the 
fruition  of  it,  must  be  immensely  superiour  to  that  which  con- 
cerns merely  the  transient  enjoyments  of  the  present  life. 
How  sublime  then  is  the  object  which  religion,  and  religion 
only,  exhibits  as  the  ground  of  supernatural  interpositions ! 
This  object  is  no  other  than  the  interest  of  man,  a  reasonable 
and  moral  agent,  the  only  being  in  this  lower  world  which  bears 
in  his  soul  the  image  of  his  Maker ;  not  the  interest  of  an 
individual,  but  of  the  kind  ;  not  for  a  limited  duration,  but  for 
eternity :  an  object  at  least  in  one  respect  adequate  to  the  ma- 
jesty of  God. 


Sect.  6.  PROOF  FROM  TESTIMONY.  433. 

Does  this  appear  to  the  essayist  too  much  like  arguing  a 
priori^  of  which  I  know  he  hath  a  detestation?  It  is  just  such 
an  argument,  as,  presupposing  the  most  rational  principles  of 
Deism,  results  from  those  maxims  concerning  intelligent 
causes,  land  their  operations,  which  are  founded  in  general 
experience,  and  which  uniformly  lead  us  to  expect,  that  the 
end  will  be  proportionate  to  the  means.  The  Pagans  of  Rome 
had  notions  of  their  divinities  infinitely  inferiour  to  the  opi- 
nions concerning  God,  which  in  Christian  countries  are  main- 
tained even  by  those,  who,  for  distinction's  sake,  are  called 
Deists.  Yet  such  of  the  former  as  had  any  justness  of  taste, 
were  offended  with  those  poets,  who  exhibited  the  celestials  on 
slight  occasions,  and  for  trivial  purposes,  interfering  in  the  af- 
fairs of  men.  Why  ?  Because  such  an  exhibition  shocked  all 
the  principles  of  probability.  It  had  not  that  verisimilitude 
which  is  absolutely  necessary  to  render  fiction  agreeable.  Ac- 
cordingly it  is  a  precept,  with  relation  to  the  machinery  of  the 
drama,  given  by  one  who  was  both  a  critick  and  a  poet,  That 
a  god  must  never  be  introduced^  unless  to  accomplish  some  import- 
ant design  which  could  not  be  otherwise  e^ectuated*.  The  foun- 
dation of  this  rule,  which  is  that  of  my  argument,  is  therefore 
one  of  those  indisputable  principles,  which  are  found  every 
where,  among  the  earliest  results  of  experience. 

Thus  it  appears,  that  from  the  dignity  of  the  end,  there 
ariseth  a  peculiar  presumption  in  favour  of  such  miracles,  as 
are  said  to  have  been  wrought  in  support  of  religion.  -» 


SECTION  VI. 

Inquiry  into  the  meaning  and  propriety  of  one  of  Mr,  Hume's 
favourite  maxims, 

A  HERE  is  a  method  truly  curious,  suggested  by  the  author, 
for  extricating  the  mind,  should  the  evidence  from  testimony 
be  so  great,  that  its  falsehood  might,  as  he  terms  it,  be  ac- 
counted miraculous.  In  this  puzzling  case,  when  a  man  is  so 
beset  with  miracles,  that  he  is  under  a  necessity  of  admitting 
one,  he  must  always  take  care  it  be  the  smallest ;  for  it  is  an 
axiom  in  this  writer's  dialectick,  That  the  probability  of  the 
fact  is  in  the  inverse  ratio  of  the  quantity  of  miracle  there  is  in 
it.     "  I  weigh,"  says  lie,  "  the  one  miracle  against  the  other, 

*  Nee  deus  intersit>  nisidignus  vindice  nodus 
Incident.  HonxT. 

I  i  i 


434  MIRACLES  CAPABLE  OF  Part  L 

"  and  according  to  the  superiority  which  1  discover,  I  pro- 
''  nounce  my  decision,  and  always  reject  the  greater  miracle*." 

Now,  of  this  method,  which  will  no  doubt  he  thought  by 
many  to  be  very  ingenious,  and  which  appears  to  the  essayist 
both  very  niomentous  and  very  perspicuous,  I  own,  I  am  not 
able  to  discover  either  the  reasonableness  or  the  use. 

First,  I  cannot  see  the  reasonableness.  '  A  miracle,'  to 
adopt  his  own  definition,  '  implies  the  transgression,'  or  rather 
the  suspension,  '  of  some  law  of  nature  ;  and  that  either  by 

*  a  particular  volition  of  the    Deity,  or  by  the   interposal  of 

*  some  invisible  agent  f.'  Now,  as  I  should  think,  from  the 
principles  laid  down  in  the  preceding  section,  that  it  would  be 
for  no  trifling  purpose,  that  the  laws  of  nature  would  be  sus- 
pended, and  either  the  Deity  or  an  invisible  agent  would  inter- 
pose ;  it  is  on  the  same  principles,  natural  to  imagine,  that  the 
means,  or  miracle  performed,  should  bear  a  proportion  in  re- 
spect of  dignity  and  greatness,  to  the  end  proposed.  Were  I 
therefore  under  such  a  necessity  as  is  supposed  by  Mr.  Hume, 
of  admitting  the  truth  of  a  miracle,  I  acknowledge,  that  of  two 
contradictory  miracles,  where  all  other  circumstances  are 
equal,  I  should  think  it  reasonable  to  believe  the  greater.  I 
shall  borrow  an  illustration  from  the  author  himself.  "  A  mira- 
"  cle,"  he  says,  "  may  either  be  dhcoxierable  by  men  or  not. 
"  This  alters  not  its  nature  and  essence.  The  raising  of  a 
"  house  or  ship  into  the  air  is  a  visible  miracle  ;  the  raising  of 
"  a  feather,  when  the  wind  wants  ever  so  little  of  a  force  requi- 
*'  site  for  that  purpose  is  as  real  a  miracle,  though  not  so  sen-' 
"  siblt  with  regard  to  usj."  Surely  if  any  miracle  may  be 
called  little^  the  last  mentioned  is  entitled  to  that  denomination, 
not  only  because  it  is  an  undiscoverable  and  insensible  miracle, 
but  because  the  quantum  of  miraculous  force  requisite,  is, 
by  the  hypothesis,  ever  so  little^  or  the  least  conceivable.  Yet 
if  it  were  certain,  that  God,  angel,  or  spirit,  were,  for  one  of 
those  purposes,  to  interpose  in  suspending  the  laws  of  nature  ; 
I  believe  most  men  would  join  with  me  in  thinking,  that  it 
v/ould  be  rather  for  the  raising  of  a  house  or  ship  than  for  the 
raising  of  a  feather. 

But  though  the  maxim  laid  dov*'n  b}^  the  author  were  just,  I 
cannot  discover  in  what  instance,  or  by  what  application,  it  can 
be  rendered  of  any  utility.  Why  ?  Because  we  have  no  rule, 
whereby  we  c;'.n  judge  of  the  greatness  of  miracles.  I  allow, 
that  in  such  a  singular  instance,  as  that  above  quoted  from  the 
essaA',  we  may  judge  safely  enough.  But  that  can  be  of  no 
practical  use.     In  almost  every  case  that  will  occur,  I  may 

*  p.  182.  t  lb.  in  the  note.  \  ib.  in  the  notei 


Sect.  6.         PROOF  FROM  TESTIMONY.  435 

warrantably  aver,  that  it  will  be  impossible  for  the  acutest  in- 
tellect to  decide,  which  of  the  two  is  the  greater  miracle.  As 
to  the  author,  I  cannot  find  that  he  has  favoured  us  with  any- 
light  in  so  important  and  so  critical  a  question.  Have  we  not 
then  some  reason  to  dread,  that  the  task  will  not  be  less  diffi- 
cult to  furnish  us  with  a  measure^  by  which  we  can  detei'mine 
the  magnitude  of  miracles  ;  than  to  provide  us  with  a  balance, 
by  which  we  can  ascertain  the  comparative  weight  of  testimo- 
nies and  experiences  ? 

If  leaving  the  speculations  of  the  essayist,  we  shall,  in  order 
to  be  assisted  on  this  subject,  recur  to  his  example  and  deci- 
sions :  let  us  consider  the  miracle  which  vi^as  recited  in  the 
third  section,  and  which  he  declares,  would,  on  the  evidence  of 
such  testimony  as  he  supposes,  not  only  be  probable,  but  cer- 
tain. For  my  part,  it  is  not  in  my  power  to  conceive  a  greater 
miracle  than  that  is.  The  whole  universe  is  affected  by  it ; 
the  earth,  the  sun,  the  moon,  the  stars.  The  most  invariable 
laws  of  nature  with  which  we  are  acquainted,  even  those  which 
regulate  the  motions  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  and  dispense 
darkness  and  light  to  worlds,  are  violated.  I  appeal  to  the  au- 
thor himself,  whether  it  could  be  called  a  greater,  or  even  so 
great  a  miracle,  that  all  the  writers  at  that  time,  or  even  all 
mankind,  had  been  seized  with  a  new  species  of  epidemical 
delirium,  which  had  given  rise  to  this  strange  illusion.  But 
in  this  the  author  is  remarkably  unfortunate,  that  the  princi- 
ples by  which  he  in  fact  regulates  his  judgment  and  belief,  are 
often  the  reverse  of  those  which  he  endeavours  to  establish  in 
his  theory. 

Shall  I  hazard  a  conjecture  ?  It  is,  that  the  word  miracle,  as 
thus  used  by  the  author,  is  used  in  a  vague  and  improper 
sense,  as  a  synonymous  term  for  improbable ;  and  that  believ- 
ing the  less,  and  rejecting  the  greater  miracle,  denote  simply 
believing  what  is  least,  and  rejecting  what  is  most  improbable ; 
or  still  more  explicitly  believing  what  we  think  most  worthy 
of  belief,  and  rejecting  what  we  think  least  -worthy.  I  am 
aware,  on  a  second  perusal  of  the  author's  words,  that  my 
talent  in  guessing  may  be  justly  questioned.  He  hath  in 
effect  told  us  himself  what  he  means.  "  When  any  one," 
says  he,  "  tells  me,  that  he  saw  a  dead  man  restored  to  life, 
"  I  immediately  consider  with  myself,  whether  it  be  more" 
'•'•probable,  that  this  person  should  either  deceive  or  be  de- 
""  ceived,  or  that  the  fact  he  relates,  should  really  have  hap- 
"  pened.  I  weigh  the  one  Tniroclc  against  the  other  ;  and 
"  according  to  the  superiority  which  I  discover,  I  pronounce 
"  my  decision,  and  always  reject  the  greater  miracle.  If  the 
*'  falsehood  of  his  testimony  would  be  more  miraculous  than 


436  MIRACLES  CAPABLE  &?c.  Part  L 

"  the  event  which  he  re  ate s  ;  then,  and  not  till  then,  can  he 
"  pretend  to  command  my  belief  or  opinion*."  At  first  indeed 
one.  is  ready  to  exclaim,  What  a  strange  revolution  is  here  ! 
The  belief  of  miracles  then,  even  by  Mr.  Hume's  account,  is 
absolutely  inevitable.  Miracles  themselves  too,  so  far  from 
bein;;^  impossible,  or  even  extraordinary,  are  the  commonest 
things  in  nature  ;  so  common,  that  when  any  miraculous  fact 
is  attested  to  us,  we  are  equally  under  a  necessity  of  believing 
a  mirrtcle,  whether  we  believe  the  fact,  or  deny  it.  The 
whole  ciifterence  between  the  essayist  and  us,  is  at  length 
reduced  to  this  single  point.  Whether  greater  or  smaller 
miracles  are  entitled  to  the  preference.  This  mystery  how- 
ever vanishes  on  a  nearer  inspection.  The  style,  we  find,  is 
figurative,  and  the  author  is  all  the  while  amusing  both  his 
readers  and  himself  with  an  unusual  application  of  a  familiar 
term.  What  is  called  the  weighing  of  prohahilities  in  one 
sentence,  is  the  weighing  of  miraclea  in  the  next.  If  it  were 
asked.  For  what  reason  did  not  Mr.  Hume  express  his  senti- 
ment in  ordinary  and  proper  words  ?  I  could  only  answer,  I 
know  no  reason  but  one,  and  that  is,  To  give  the  appearance 
of  novelty  and  depth  to  one  of  those  very  harmless  proposi- 
tions, which  by  philosophers  are  called  identical^  and  which, 
to  say  the  truth,  need  some  disguise,  to  make  them  pass  upon 
the  world  with  tolerable  decency. 

What  then  shall  be  said  of  the  conclusion  which  he  gives  as 
the  sum  and  quintessence  of  the  first  part  of  the  essay  ?  The 
best  thing  for  aught  I  know,  that  can  be  said,  is,  that  it  con- 
tains a  most  certain  truth,  though  at  the  same  time  the  least 
significant,  that  ever  perhaps  was  ushered  into  the  world  with 
so  much  solemnity.  In  order,  therefore,  to  make  plainer 
English  of  his  plain  consequence^  let  us  only  change  the  word 
miraculous^  as  applied  to  the  falsehood  of  human  testimony, 
into  improbable^  which  in  this  passage  is  entirely  equivalent, 
and  observe  the  effect  produced  by  this  elucidation.  "  The 
"  plain  consequence  is,  and  it  is  a  general  maxim,  worthy  of 
*'  our  attention^  That  no  testimony   is  sufficient  to  es- 

"  TABLISH  A  MIRACLE  ;  UNLESS  THE  TESTIMONY  BE  OF  SUCH 
*'  A  KIND,  THAT  ITS  FALSEHOOD  WOULD  BE  MORE  IMPRO- 
"  BABLE,    THAN  THE   FACT  WHICH    IT    ENDEAVOURS    TO  ES- 

**  TABi.iSH'f-."  If  the  reader  tbisiks  himself  instructed  by  this 
discovery,  I  should  be  loth  to  envy  him  the  pleasure  he  may 
derive  from  it. 

*  p.  132.  t  lb. 


DISSERTATION 


ON 


MIRACLES. 


PART  II. 

The  miracles  on  which  the  belief  of  Christianity  is  founded, 
are  sufficiently  attested. 


SECTION   I. 

There  is  no  presumption^  arising  from  human  nature^  againsi 
the  miracles  said  to  have  been  wrought  in  proof  of  Chris- 
tianity, 

X  ROM  what  hath  been  evinced  in  the  fourth  and  fifth  sec- 
tions of  the  former  part,  with  regard  to  religion  in  general, 
two  corollaries  are  clearly  deducible  in  favour  of  Christianity. 
One  is,  That  the  presumption  arising  from  the  dignity  of  the 
end,  to  say  the  least  of  it,  can  in  no  religion  be  pleaded  with 
greater  advantage,  than  in  the  Christian.  The  other  is,  That 
the  presumption  arising  from  the  religious  aflfection,  instead 
of  weakening,  corroborates  the  evidence  of  the  gospel.  The 
faith  of  Jesus  was  promulgated,  and  gained  ground,  not  with 
the  assistance,  but  in  defiance,  of  all  the  religious  zeal  and 
prejudices  of  the  times. 

In  order  to  invalidate  the  second  corollary,  it  will  possibl);- 
be  urged,  that  proselytes  to  a  new  religion,  may  be  gained  at 
first ;  either  by  address  and  eloquence,  or  by  the  appearance 
of  uncommon  sanctity,  and  rapturous  fervours  of  devotion  ; 
that  if  once  people  have  commenced  proselytes,  the  transition 
to  enthusiasm  is  almost  unavoidable  ;  and  that  enthusiasm 
will  fully  account  for  the  utmost  pitch  both  of  credulity  and 
falseness. 


438  THE   MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  11. 

Admitting  that  a  few  converts  might  be  made  by  the  afore- 
said arts,  it  is  subversive  of  ail  the  laws  of  probability,  to 
imagine,  that  the  scrongest  prepossessions,  fortified  with  that 
vehement  abhorrence  which  contradiction  in  religious  princi- 
ples rarely  fails  to  excite,  should  be  so  easily  vanquished  in 
multitudes.  Besides,  the  very  pretext  of  supporting  the  doc- 
trine by  miracles,  if  a  false  pretest,  would  of  necessity  do 
unspeakable  hurt  to  the  cause.  The  pretence  of  miracles  will 
quickly  attract  the  attention  of  all  to  whom  the  new  doctrine 
is  published.  The  influence  which  address  and  eloquence, 
appearances  of  sanctity  and  fervours  of  devotion,  would  other- 
wise have  had,  however  great,  will  be  superseded  by  the  con- 
sideration of  what  is  infinitely  more  striking  and  decisive. 
The  miracles  will  therefore  first  be  canvassed,  and  canvassed 
with  a  temper  of  mind  the  most  unfavourable  to  conviction. 
It  is  not  solely  on  the  testimony  of  the  evangelists  that  Chris- 
tians believe  the  gospel,  though  that  testimony  appears  in  all 
respects  such  as  mei-its  the  highest  regard  ;  but  it  is  on  the 
success  of  the  gospel,  it  is  on  the  testimony,  as  we  may  justly 
call  it,  of  the  numberless  proselytes  that  were  made  to  a  re- 
ligion, opposing  all  the  religious  professions  then  in  the  world, 
and  appealing,  for  the  satisfaction  of  every  body,  to  the  visible 
and  miraculous  interposition  of  Heaven  in  its  favour.  The 
witnesses  considered  in  this  light,  and  in  this  light  they  ought 
to  be  considered,  will  be  found  more  than  '-  a  sufficient  num- 
*■  ber :'  and  though  perhaps  there  were  few  of  them,  what  the 
author  would  denominate  *  men  of  education  and  learning  ;- 
yet,  which  is  more  essential,  they  were  generallj'  men  of  good 
sense,  and  knowledge  enough  to  secure  ihem  against  all  delu- 
sion, as  to  those  plain  facts  for  which  they  gave  their  testi- 
mony ;  men  who,  fin  the  common  acceptation  of  the  words) 
neither  did,  nor  could  derive  to  themselves  either  interest  or 
honour  by  their  attestations,  but  did  thereby,  on  the  contrary, 
evidently  abandon  all  hopes  of  both. 

>  It  deserves  also  to  be  remembered,  that  there  is  here  no 
contradictory  testimony,  notwithstanding  that  both  the  foun- 
der of  our  religion,  and  his  adherents,  were  from  the  first 
surrounded  by  inveterate  enemies,  who  never  '  esteemed  the 

*  matter  too  inconsiderable  to  deserve  their  attention  or  re- 

*  gard  ;'  and  who,  as  they  could  not  v^ant  the  means,  gave 
evident  proofs  that  they  wanted  not  tire  inclination  to  detect 
the  fraud,  if  there  had  been  any  fraud  to  be  detected.  They 
were  jealous  of  their  own  reputation  and  authority,  and  fore- 
saw but  too  clearly,  that  the  success  of  Jesus  would  give  a 
fatal  blow  to  both.  As  to  the  testimonies  themselves,  we  may 


Sfect.  1.  GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  439 

permit  the  author  to  try  them  by  his  own  rules*.  There  is 
here  no  opposition  of  testimony  ;  there  is  no  apparent  ground 
of  suspicion  from  the  character  of  the  witnesses  ;  there  is  no 
interest  which  they  could  have  in  imposing  on  the  world  j 
there  is  not  a  small  number  of  witnesses,  they  are  innumera- 
ble. Do  the  historians  of  our  Lord  deliver  their  testimony 
with  doubt  and  hesitation  ?  Do  they  fall  into  the  opposite 
extreme  of  using  too  violent  asseverations?  So  far  from  both, 
that  the  most  amazing  instances  of  divine  pbwer,  and  the 
most  interesting  events,  are  related  without  any  censure  op 
reflection  of  the  writers  on  persons,  parties,  actions,  or  opi- 
nions ;  with  such  an  unparalleled  and  unaffected  simplicity,  as 
demonstrates,  that  they  were  neither  themselves  animated  by 
passion  like  enthusiasts,  nor  had  any  design  of  working  on 
the  passions  of  their  readers.  The  greatest  miracles  are  re- 
corded, with  as  little  appearance  either  of  doubt  or  wonder  in 
the  writer,  and  with  as  little  suspicion  of  the  reader's  incre- 
dulity, as  the  most  ordinary  incidents  :  A  manner  as  unlike 
that  of  impostors  as  of  enthusiasts  ;  a  manner  in  which  those 
writers  are  altogether  singular  ;  and  I  will  add  a  manner 
which  can  on  no  supposition  be  tolerably  accounted  for,  but 
that  of  the  truth,  and  not  of  the  truth  only,  but  of  the  notoriety, 
of  the  events  which  they  related.  They  spoke  like  people, 
who  had  themselves  been  long  familiarized  to  such  acts  of 
omnipotence  and  grace.  They  spoke  like  people,  who  knew 
that  many  of  the  most  marvellous  actions  they  related,  had 
been  so  publickly  performed,  and  in  the  presence  of  multitudes 
alive  at  the  time  of  their  writing,  as  to  be  uncontrovertible, 
and  as  in  fact  not  to  have  been  controverted,  even  by  their 
bitterest  foes.  They  could  boldly  appeal  on  this  head  to  their 
enemies.  Aman^  say  they,  speaking  of  their  master-|-,  approved 
of  God  among  you-,  by  miracles  and  xvonders  and  signs^  xvhich 
God  did  by  him  in  the  midst  of  you^  as  you  yourselves  also 
KNOW.  The  objections  of  Christ's  persecutors  against  his 
doctrine,  those  objections  also  which  regard  the  nature  of  his 
miracles,  are,  together  with  his  answers,  faithfully  recorded 
by  the  sacred  historians  ;  it  is  strange,  if  the  occasion  had 
been  given,  that  we  have  not  the  remotest  hint  of  any  objec- 
tions against  the  reality  of  his  miracles,  and  a  confutation  of 
those  objections. 

But  passing  the  manner  in  which  the  first  proselytes  may 
be  gained  to  a  new  religion,  and  supposing  some  actually 
gained,  no  matter  how  to  the  faith  of  Jesus  ;  can  it  be  easily 
accounted  for,  that,  even  with  the  help  of  those  early  converts, 

*  p.  ire.  f  Acts  ii.  22. 


440  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  IL 

this  religion  should  have  been  propagated  in  the  world,  on  the 
false  pretence  of  miracles  I  Nothing  more  easily,  says  the  au- 
thor. Those  original  propagators  of  the  gospel  have  been  de- 
ceived themselves ;  for  "  a  religionist  may  be  an  enthusiast, 
**  and  imagine  he  sees  what  has  no  reality*." 

Were  this  admitted,  it  would  not  in  the  present  case,  re- 
move the  difficulty.  He  must  not  only  himself  imagine  he 
se^s  what  has  no  reality,  he  must  make  every  body  present, 
those  who  are  no  enthusiasts,  nor  even  friends,  nay  he  must 
make  enemies  also  imagine  they  see  the  same  thing  which  he 
imagines  he  sees  ;  for  the  miracles  of  Jesus  were  acknowledg- 
ed by  those  who  persecuted  him. 

That  an  enthusiast  is  very  liable  to  be  imposed  on,  in  what- 
ever favours  the  particular  species  of  enthusiasm,  with  which 
he  is  affected,  none,  who  knows  any  thing  of  the  human  heart, 
will  deny.  But  still  this  frailty  hath  its  limits.  For  my  own 
part,  I  cannot  find  examples  of  any,  even  among  enthusiasts, 
(unless  to  the  conviction  of  every  body  they  were  distracted) 
who  did  not  see  and  hear  in  the  same  manner  as  other  people. 
Many  of  this  tribe  have  mistaken  the  reveries  of  a  heated 
imagination,  for  the  communications  of  the  Divine  Spirit,who 
never,  in  one  single  instance,  mistook  the  operations  of  their 
external  senses.  Without  marking  this  difference,  we  should 
make  no  distinction  between  the  enthusiastic^  character  and 
the  frantick^  which  are  in  themselves  evidently  distinct.  How 
shall  we  then  account  from  enthusiasm,  for  the  testimony  given 
by  the  apostles,  concerning  the  resurrection  of  their  master, 
and  his  ascension  into  heaven,  not  to  mention  innumerable 
other  facts  ?  In  these  it  was  impossible  that  any,  who  in  the 
use  of  their  reason  were  but  one  remove  from  Bedlamites^ 
should  have  been  deceived.  Yet,  in  the  present  case,  the  un- 
believer must  even  say  more  than  this,  and,  accumulating  ab- 
surdity upon  absurdity,  must  affirm,  that  the  apostles  were 
deceived  as  to  the  resurrection  and  ascension  of  their  master, 
notwithstanding  that  they  themselves  had  concerted  the  plan 
of  stealing  his  body,  and  concealing  it. 

But  this  is  not  the  only  resource  of  the  infidel.  If  he  is  dri- 
ven from  this  strong  hold,  he  can  take  refuge  in  another. 
Admit  the  apostles  were  not  deceived  themselves,  they  may 
nevertheless  have  been,  through  mere  devotion  and  benevo- 
lence, incited  to  deceive  the  rest  of  mankind.  The  religionist, 
rejoins  the  author,  "  may  know  his  narration  to  be  false,  and 
*'  yet  persevere  in  it,  with  the  best  intentions  in  the  world,  for 
«  the  sake  of  promoting  so  holy  a  causef ." 

»  p.  185.  t  Jb. 


Sect.  1.         GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  Ht, 

Our  religion,  to  use  its  own  nervous  language,  teacheth 
us*,  that  we  ought  not  to  lie,  or  speak  wickedly,  not  even  Jbr 
God;  that  we  ought  not  to  accept  his  person  in  judgment,  or 
tali,  or  act  deceitfully  for  him.  But  so  very  little,  it  must  be 
*  owned,  has  this  sentiment  been  attended  to,  even  in  the 
Christian  world,  that  one  would  almost  think,  it  contained  a 
strain  of  virtue  too  sublime  for  the  apprehension  of  the  multi- 
tude. It  is  therefore  a  fact  not  to  be  questioned,  that  little 
pious  frauds,  as  they  are  absurdly,  not  to  say  impiously,  called, 
have  been  often  practised  by  ignorant  zealots,  in  support  of  a 
cause,  which  they  firmly  believed  to  be  both  true  and  holy. 
But  in  all  such  cases  the  truth  and  holiness  of  the  cause  are 
wholly  independent  of  those  artifices.  A  person  may  be  per- 
suaded of  the  former,  who  is  too  clear-sighted  to  be  deceived 
by  the  latter :  for  even  a  full  conviction  of  the  truth  of  the 
cause  is  not,  in  the  least,  inconsistent  with  either  the  con- 
sciousness, or  the  detection  of  the  frauds  used  in  support  of  it. 
In  the  Romish  church,  for  example,  there  are  many  zealous 
and  orthodox  believers,  who  are  nevertheless  incapable  o£ 
being  imposed  on  by  the  lying  wonders,  which  some  of  their 
clergy  have  exhibited.  The  circunistances  of  the  apostles 
were  widely  different  from  the  circumstances,  either  of  those 
believers,  or  of  their  clergy.  Some  of  the  miraculous  events 
which  the  apostles  attested,  were  not  only  the  evidences,  but 
the  distinguishing  doctrines  of  the  religion  which  they  taught. 
There  is  therefore  in  their  case  an  absolute  inconsistency  be- 
twixt a  conviction  of  the  truth  of  the  cause,  and  the  conscious- 
ness of  the  frauds  used  in  support  of  it.  Those  frauds  them- 
selves, if  I  may  so  express  myself,  constituted  the  very  essence 
of  the  cause.  What  were  the  tenets,  by  which  they  were  dis- 
tinguished, in  their  religious  system,  particularly  from  the 
Pharisees,  who  owned  not  only  the  unity  and  perfections  of  the 
Godhead,  the  existence  of  angels  and  demons,  but  the  general 
resurrection,  and  future  state  of  rewards  and  punishments? 
Were  not  these  their  peculiar  tenets.  That  *  Jesus,  whom  the 

*  Jews  and  Romans  joined  in  crucifying  without  the  gates  of 
'  Jerusalem,  had  suffered  that  ignominious  death,  to  make 
'  atonement  for  the  sins  of  men  j-?  that,    in  testimony  of  this, 

*  and  of  the  divine  acceptance,  God  hath  raised  him  from  the 

*  dead  ?  that  he  had  exalted  him  to  his  own  right  hand,  to  ht 

*  a  prince  and  a  saviour,  to  give  repentance  to  the  people,  and. 

*  the  remission  of  their  sins|  ?  that  he  is  now  our  advocate 

*  with  the  fatherll  ?  that  he  will  descend  from  heaven  at  thfe 

,  *  Job  xiii.  7,  8.  t  Rom.  v.  6.  &c.  1  Acts  ii.  32.  hz.  v,  T^0.  &c,  x.  40.  &c> 
llJohnri.l.  1  +  ; 

K  k  k 


442  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  II. 

*  last  day,  to  judge  the  world  in  righteousness*,  and  to  receive 

*  his  faithful  disciples  into  heaven,  to  be  for  ever  with  him- 

*  self -|-  ?'  These  fundamental  articles  of  their  system,  they 
must  have  known,  deserved  no  better  appellation  than  a  string 
of  lies,  if  we  suppose  them  liars  in  the  testimony  they  gave 
of  the  resurrection  and  ascension  of  their  master.  If,  agree- 
ably to  the  Jewish  hypothesis,  they  had,  in  a  most  wonderful 
and  daring  manner,  stole  by  night  the  corpse  from  the  sepul- 
chre, that  on  the  false  report  of  his  resurrection,  they  might 
found  the  stupendous  fabrick  they  had  projected  among  them- 
selves, how  was  it  possible  they  should  conceive  the  cause  to 
be  either  true  or  holy  ?  They  must  have  known,  that  in  those 
cardinal  points,  on  which  all  depends,  they  were  false  witnes- 
ses concerning  God,  wilful  corrupters  of  the  religion  of  their 
country,  and  publick,  though  indeed  disinterested  incendiaries, 
whithersoever  they  went.  They  could  not  therefore  enjoy 
even  that  poor  solace,  '  that  the  end  will  sanctify  the  means  :'  a 
solace  with  which  the  monk  or  anchoret  silences  the  remon- 
strances of  his  conscience,  when  in  defence  of  a  religion  which 
he  regards  as  certain,  he,  by  some  pitiful  juggler-trick,  im- 
poseth  on  the  credulity  of  the  rabble.  On  the  contrary,  the 
whole  scheme  of  the  apostles  must  have  been,  and  not  only  mu3t 
have  been,  but  must  have  appeared  to  themselves,  a  most  auda- 
cious freedom  with  their  Maker,  a  villanous  imposition  on 
the  world,  and  I  will  add,  a  most  foolish  and  ridiculous  project 
of  heaping  ruin  and  disgrace  upon  themselves,  without  the  pro- 
spect of  any  compensation  in  the  present  life,  or  reversion  in 
the  future. 

Once  more,  can  we  account  for  so  extraordinary  a  phenome- 
non, by  attributing  it  to  that  most  powerful  of  all  motives,  as 
the  author  thinks  it^,  "  an  ambition  to  attain  so  sublime  a  cha- 
"  racter,  as  that  of  a  missionary,  a  prophet,  an  ambassadour 
*'  from  heaven  ?" 

Not  to  mention,  that  such  a  towering  ambition  was  but  ill 
adapted  to  the  mean  rank,  poor  educ  tion,  and  habitual  cir- 
cumstances, of  such  men  as  the  apostles  mostly  had  been  ;  a 
desire  of  that  kind,  whatever  wonders  it  may  effectuate  when 
supported  by  enthusiasm,  and  faith,  and  zeal,  must  soon  have 
been  crushed  by  the  outward,  and  to  human  appearance  insur- 
mountable difficulties  and  distresses  they  had  to  encounter ; 
when  quite  unsupported  from  within  by  either  faith,  or  hope, 
or  the  testimony  of  a  good  conscience  ;  rather,  I  should  have 
5aid,  when  they 'themselves  were  haunted  from  within  by  a 
consciousness  of  the  blackest  guilt,  impiety,  and  baseness. 
Strange  indeed  it  must  be  owned  without  a  parallel  that  in 

•  Acts  X.  42.    xvJi.  31.  t  John  xiv.  3.  |  p.  200. 


Sect.  2.         GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  44a 

such  a  cause,  and  in  such  circumstances,  not  only  one,  but  al], 
should  have  the  resolution  to  persevere  to  the  last,  in  spite  of 
infamy  and  torture ;  and  that  no  one  among  so  many  confede- 
rates should  be  induced  to  betray  the  dreadful  secret. 

Thus  it  appears,  that  no  address  in  the  founder  of  our  reli- 
gion, that  no  enthusiastick  credulity^  no  pious  frauds^  no  ambi- 
tious views^  in  the  pjrst  converts,  will  account  for  its  pro- 
pagation on  the  plea  of  miracles,  if  false  ;  and  that  consequently 
there  is  no  presumption  arising  from  human  nature  against  the 
miracles  said  to  have  been  wrought  in  proof  of  Christi- 
anity. 


SECTION  IL 

There  is  no  presumption  arising  from  the  history  of  mankindj 
against  the  miracles  said  to  have  been  wrought  in  proof  of 
Christianity, 

XN  the  foregoing  section,  I  reasoned  only  from  the  knowledge 
that  experience  affords  us  of  human  nature^  and  of  the  motives 
by  which  men  are  influenced  in  their  conduct.  I  come  now 
to  the  examination  of  facts,  that  I  may  know  whether  the  his- 
tory  of  mankind  will  invalidate  or  corroborate  my  reasonings. 
The  essayist  is  confident,  that  all  the  evidence  resulting 
hence  is  on  his  side.  Nay  so  unquestionable  a  truth  does  this 
appear  to  him,  that  he  never  attempts  to  prove  it :  he  always 
presupposeth  it,  as  a  point  universally  acknowledged.     '  Men 

*  in  all  ages,'  we  learn  from  a  passage  already  quoted,  '  have 

*  been  much  imposed  on,  by  ridiculous  stories  of  miracles  as- 
'  cribed  to  new  systems  of  religion*.'     Again  he  asserts,  that 

*  the  violations  of  truth  are  more  common  in  the  testimony 

*  concerning  miracles,  than  in  that  concerning  any  other  reli- 

*  gious  matter  of  factf .'     These  assertions,  however,  though 

*  used  for  the  same  purpose  the  attentive  reader  will  observe, 
are  far  from  conveying  the  same  sense,  or  being  of  equal 
weight  in  the  argument.  The  difference  hath  been  marked  in 
the  fourth  section  of  the  first  part  of  this  tract.  The  oracular 
predictions  among  the  ancient  Pagans,  and  the  pretended 
wonders  performed  by  capuchins  and  friars,  by  itinerant  or 
stationary  teachers  among  the  Roman  Catholicks,  the  author 
will  doubtless  reckon  among  religious  miracles  ;  but  he  can 
with  no  propriety  denominate  them,  miracles  ascribed  to  a  new 

*  p.  204,  in  the  note.  f  p.  205.  in  the  note. 


M4f  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  11. 

system  of  religion*.  Now  it  is  with  those  of  the  class  last 
mentioned,  and  with  those  only,  that  I  am  concerned ;  for 
it  is  only  to  them  that  the  miracles  wrought  in  proof  of  Chris- 
tianity bear  any  analogy. 

I  shall  then  examine  impartially  this  bold  assertion,  that 
'  men  in  all  ages  have  been  much  imposed  on,  by  ridiculous 
'  stories  of  miracles  ascribed  to  new  systems  of  religion.' 
For  my  part,  I  am  fully  satisfied,  that  there  is  not  the  shadow 
of  truth  in  it :  and  I  am  utterly  at  a  loss  to  conceive  what 
could  induce  an  author,  so  well  versed  in  the  annals  both  of 
ancient  and  modern  times  as  Mr.  Hume,  in  such  a  positive 
manner  to  advance  it.  I  believe  it  will  require  no  elaborate 
disquisition  to  evince,  that  these  two,  Judaism  and  Christi- 
anity, are  of  all  that  have  subsisted,  or  now  subsist  in  the 
world,  the  only  religions,  which  claim  to  have  been  attended 
in  their  first  publication  with  the  evidence  of  miracles.  It  de- 
serves also  to  be  remarked,  that  it  is  more  in  conformity  to 
common  language,  and  incidental  distinctions  which  have 
arisen,  than  to  strict  propriety,  that  I  call  Judaism  and  Chris- 
tianity, two  religions.  It  is  true,  the  Jewish  creed,  in  the  days 
of  our  Saviour,  having  been  corrupted  by  rabbinical  traditions, 
stood  in  many  respects,  and  at  this  day  stands  in  direct  oppo- 
sition to  the  Gospel.  But  it  is  not  in  this  acceptation  that  I 
use  the  word  Judaism.  Such  a  creed,  I  am  sensible,  we  can 
no  more  denominate  the  doctrine  of  the  Old  Testament,  than 
we  can  denominate  the  creed  of  Pope  Pius  the  doctrine  of  the 
New.  And  truly  the  fate  which  both  institutions,  that  of 
Moses,  and  that  of  Christ,  have  met  with  among  men,  hath 
been  in  many  respects  extremely  similar.  But  when,  on  the 
contrary,  we  consider  the  religion  of  the  Jews,  not  as  the  sys- 

*  Should  the  author  insist,  that  such  miracles  are  nevertheless  meant  to  establish, 
if  not  a  new  system,  at  least  some  ne^v  point  of  religion  ;  that  those  which  are 
wrought  in  Spain,  for  example,  are  not  intended  as  proofs  of  the  gospel,  but  as 
proofs  of  the  efficacy  of  a  particular  crucifix  or  relick ;  which  is  always  a  new 
point,  or  at  least  not  universally  received:  I  must  beg  the  reader  will  consider, 
•what  is  the  meaning  of  this  expression,  a  ne-iv  point  of  religion,  It  is  not  a  new 
system,  it  is  nnt  even  a  new  doctrine.  We  know,  that  one  article  of  faith  in  the 
church  of  R  me  is,  that  tlie  nnages  and  reiicks  of  saints  ought  to  be  worshipped. 
We  know  also,  that  in  proof  of  this  article,  it  is  one  of  their  principal  arguments, 
that  miracles  are  wrought  by  means  of  such  reiicks  and  images.  We  know  fur- 
ther, that  that  church  never  attempted  to  enumerate  her  reiicks  and  other  trum- 
pery, and  thus  to  ascertain  the  individual  objects  of  the  adoration  of  her  votaries. 
The  producing  therefore  a  ?iew  relick,  image,  or  crucifix,  as  an  object  of  worship, 
implies  not  the  smallest  deviation  from  the  faith  established ,-  at  the  same  time  the 
opinion,  that  miracles  are  performed  by  means  of  such  relick,  image,  or  crucifix, 
proves,  in  the  minds  of  the  people,  for  the  reason  assigned,  a  very  strong  conjirtn- 
aiien  of  the  faith  established.  All  such  miracles  therefore  must  be  considered,  as 
■wrought  in  support  of  the  received  superstition,  and  accordingly  are  always  fa- 
voured by  the  popular  prejudi<:es. 


Sect.  2.        GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  US 

tern  of  faith  and  practice,  which  presently  obtains,  or  hereto- 
fore hath  obtained  among  that  people  ;  but  solely  as  the  reli- 
gion  that  is  revealed  in  the  lazu  and  the  prophets^  we  must 
acknowledge,  that  in  this  institution  are  contained  the  rudi- 
ments of  the  gospel.  The  same  great  plan  carried  on  by  the 
Divine  Providence,  for  the  recovery  and  final  happiness  of 
mankind,  is  the  subject  of  both  dispensations.  They  are  by 
consequence  closely  connected.  In  the  former  we  are  ac- 
quainted with  the  occasion  and  rise^  in  the  latter  more  fully 
with  the  progress  and  completion  of  this  benign  scheme.  It  is 
for  this  reason  that  the  scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament^  which 
alone  contain  the  authentick  religion  of  the  synagogue,  have 
^ver  been  acknowledged  in  the  church,  an  essential  part  of  the 
gospel-revelation.  The  apostles  and  evangelists  in  every  part 
of  their  writings,  presuppose' the  truth  of  the  Mosaick  econo- 
my, and  often  found  both  their  doctrine  and  arguments  upon 
it.  It  is  therefore,  I  affirm,  only  in  proof  of  this  one  series  of 
revelations,  that  the  aid  of  miracles  hath  with  success  been 
pretended  to. 

Can  the  Pagan  religion,  can,  I  should  rather  say,  any  of 
the  numberless  religions  (for  they  are  totally  distinct)  known 
by  the  common  name  of  Pagan^  produce  any  claim  of  this 
kind  that  will  merit  our  attention  ?  If  the  author  knows  of 
any,  I  wish  he  had  mentioned  it  ;  for  in  all  antiquity,  as  far 
as  my  acquaintance  with  it  reacheth,  I  can  recollect  no  such 
claim.  However,  that  I  may  not,  on  the  one  hand,  appear 
to  pass  the  matter  too  slightly  ;  or,  on  the  other,  lose  myself, 
as  Mr.  Hume  expresses  it,  in  too  wide  a  field  ;  I  shall  briefly 
consider,  whether  the  ancient  religions  of  Greece  or  Rome 
(which  of  all  the  species  of  heathenish  superstition  are  on  ma- 
ny accounts  the  most  remarkable)  can  present  a  claim  of  this 
nature.  Will  it  be  said,  that  that  monstrous  heap  of  fables 
we  find  in  ancient  bards,  relating  to  the  genealogy,  produc- 
tions, amours,  and  achievements,  of  the  gods,  are  the  mira- 
cles on  which  Greek  and  Roman  Paganism  claims  to  be 
founded  ? 

If  one  should  talk  in  this  manner,  I  must  remind  him,  jfrsf, 
that  these  are  by  no  means  exhibited  as  evidences,  but  as 
the  THEOLOGY  itself;  the  poets  always  using  the  same  affirma- 
tive style  concerning  what  passed  in  heaven,  in  hell,  and  in  the 
ocean,  where  men  could  not  be  spectators,  as  concerning  what 
passed  upon  the  earth :  secondly^  that  all  those  mythological  tales 
are  confessedly  recorded  many  centuries  after  thev  are  sup- 
posed to  have  happened  ;  no  voucher,  no  testimony,  nothing 
that  can  deserve  the  name  of  evidence  having  been  produced, 
Pir  even  alleged,  in  proof  of  them  :    thirdly^  that  the  intention 


445  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  IL 

of  the  writers  seems  to  be  solely  the  amusement,  not  the  con*' 
viction  of  their  readers  ;  that  accordingly  no  writer  scruples 
to  model  the  mythology  to  his  particular  taste,  or  rather  ca- 
price ;  but  considering  this  as  a  province  subject  to  the  laws 
of  Parnassus,  all  agree  in  arrogating  here  the  immemorial  pri- 
vilege of  poets,  to  say  and  feign,  unquestioned,  what  they 
please  ;  zrxd  fourthly^  that  at  least  several  of  their  narrations  are 
allegorical,  and  as  plainly  intended  to  convey  some  physical 
or  moral  instruction,  as  any  of  the  apologues  of  ^sop.  But 
to  have  said  even  thus  much  in  refutation  of  so  absurd  a  plea, 
will  perhaps  to  many  readers  appear  superfluous. 

Leaving  therefore  the  endless  absurdities  and  incoherent 
fictions  of  idolaters,  I  shall  enquire,  in  the  next  place,  whe- 
ther the  Mahometan  worship  (which  in  its  speculative  prin- 
ciples appears  more  rational)  pretends  to  have  been  built  on  the 
evidence  of  miracles. 

Mahomet,  the  founder  of  this  profession,  openly  and  fre- 
quently, as  all  the  world  knows,  disclaimed  such  evidence. 
He  frankly  owned  that  he  had  no  commission  nor  power  to 
work  miracles,  being  sent  of  God  to  the  people  only  as  a  preach- 
er. Not  indeed  but  that  there  are  things  mentioned  in  the 
revelation  he  pretended  to  give  them,  which,  if  true,  would 
have  been  miraculous  ;  such  are  the  nocturnal  visits  of  the 
angel  Gabriel,  (not  unlike  those  secret  interviews,  which 
Numa,  the  institutor  of  the  Roman  rites,  affirmed  that  he  had 
with  the  goddess  Egeria)  his  getting  from  time  to  time  parcels 
of  the  uncreated  book  transmitted  to  him  from  heaven,  and 
his  most  amazing  night-journey.  But  these  miracles  could  be 
no  evidences  of  his  mission.  Why  ?  Because  no  person  was 
witness  to  them.  On  the  contrary,  it  was  because  his  adhe- 
rents had  previously  and  implicitly  believed  his  apostleship, 
that  they  admitted  things  so  incredible,  on  his  bare  declara- 
tion. There  is  indeed  one  miracle,  and  but  one,  which  he 
urgeth  against  the  infidels,  as  the  main  support  of  his  cause  ; 
a  miracle,  for  which  even  we,  in  this  distant  region  and  peri- 
od, have  not  only  the  evidence  of  testimony,  but,  if  we  please 
to  use  it,  all  the  evidence  which  the  contemporaries  and  coun- 
trymen of  this  military  apostle  ever  enjoyed.  The  miracle  I 
mean  is  the  manifest  divinity,  or  supernatural  excellence,  of 
the  scriptures  which  he  gave  them;  a  miracle,  concerning 
which  I  shall  only  say,  that  as  it  falls  not  under  the  cognisance 
of  the  senses,  but  of  a  much  more  fallible  tribunal,  taste  in 
composition,  and  critical  discernment,  so  a  principle  of  less 
efficacy  than  enthusiasm,  even  the  slightest  partiality,  may 
make  a  man,  in  this  particular,  imagine  he  perceives  what 
hath  no  reality.     Certain  ifis,  that  notwithstanding  the  many 


Sect.  J.  GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTEST.  40. 

defiances  which  the  prophet  gave  his  enemies  sometimes  to 
produce  ten  chapters,  sometimes  one,  that  could  bear  to  be 
compared  with  an  equal  portion  of  the  perspicuous  book*, 
they  seem  not  in  the  least  to  have  been  convinced,  that  there 
was  any  thing  miraculous  in  the  matter.  Nay  this  sublime 
performance,  so  highly  venerated  by  every  Mussulman,  they 
were  not  afraid  to  blaspheme  as  contemptible,  calling  it,  "  A 
"  confused  heap  of  dreams,"  and  "  the  silly  fables  of  ancient 
*'  timesf". 

*  Alcoran.     The  chapter 'of  the  cow,-        of  Jonas, of  Hud. 

f Of  cattle, of  the  spoils, of  the  prophets.    That  the  Alcoran  bears 

a  very  strong  resemblance  to  the  Talmud  is  indeed  evident ;  but  I  hardly  think, 
we  can  have  a  mosre  striking  instance  of  the  prejudices  of  modern  infidels,  than 
in  their  comparing  this  motley  composition  to  the  writings  of  the  Old  and  New 
^Testaments.  Let  tfce  reader  but  take  the  trouble  to  peruse  the  history  of  Joseph 
by  Mahomet,  which  is  the  subject  of  a  very  long  chapter,  and  to  compare  it  with 
the  account  of  that  patriarch  given  by  Moses,  and  if  he  doth  not  perceive  at  once 
the  immense  inferiority  of  the  former,  I  shall  never,  for  my  part,  undertake  by 
argument  to  convince  him  of  it.  To  me  it  appears  even  almost  incredible,  that 
the  most  beautiful  and  most  affecting  passages  of  holy  writ,  should  be  so  wretch- 
edly disfigured  by  a  writer  whose  intention,  we  are  certain  was  not  to  burlesque 
them.  But  that  every  reader  may  be  qualified  to  form  some  notion  of  this  mira- 
cle of  a  book,  I  have  subjoined  a  specimen  of  it,  from  the  chapter  of  tie  ant ; 
where  we  are  informed  particularly  of  the  cause  of  the  visit  which  the  queen  of 
Sheba  (there  called  Saba  made  to  Solomon,  and  of  the  occasion  of  her  conver- 
sion from  idolatry.  I  have  not  selected  this  passage  on  account  of  any  special 
futility  to  be  found  in  it,  for  the  like  absurdities  may  be  observed  in  every  page  of 
the  performance ;  but  I  have  selected  it,  because  it  is  short,  and  because  it  con- 
tains a  distinct  story  which  bears  some  relation  to  a  passage  of  scripture.  I  use 
Mr.  Sale's  version,  which  is  the  latest  and  the  most  approved,  omittmg  only,  for 
the  sake  of  brevity,  such  supplementary  expressions,  as  have  been  without  neces» 
sity  inserted  by  the  translator.  •<  Solomon  was  David's  heir ;  and  he  said,  O 
**  men,  we  have  been  taught  the  speech  of  birds,  and  have  had  all  things  be- 
■*'  stowed  on  us;  this  is  manifest  excellence.  And  his  armies  were  gathered  to- 
"  gether  to  Solomon,  consisting  of  genii,  and  men,  and  birds;  and  they  were 
•«  led  in  distinct  bands,  till  they  came  to  the  valley  of  ants.  An  ant  said,  O 
"  ants,  enter  ye  into  your  habitations,  lest  Solomon  and  his  army  tread  you  un- 
**  der  foot,  and  perceive  it  not.  He  smiled,  laughing  at  her  words,  and  said,  O 
**  Lord,  excite  me,  that  I  may  be  thankful  for  thy  favour,  wherewith  thou  hast 
**  favoured  me,  and  my  parents ;  and  that  I  may  do  that  which  is  right  and  well 
*'  pleasing  to  thee :  and  introduce  me,  through  thy  mercy  among  thy  servants  the 
"  righteous.  And'he  viewed  the  birds,  and  said.  What  is  the  reason  that  I  see 
"  not  the  lapwing  ?  Is  she  absent  ?  Verily  I  will  chastise  her  with  a  severe  chas- 
*'  tisement,  or  I  will  put  her  to  death;  unless  she  bring  me  a  just  excuse.  And 
"  she  tarried  not  long,  and  said,  1  have  viewed  that  which  thou  hast  not  viewed ; 
«'  and  I  come  to  thee  from  Saba,  with  a  certain  piece  of  news.  I  found  a  wo- 
*'  man  to  reign  over  them,  who  is  provided  with  every  thing,  and  hath  a  magni- 
"  ficcnt  throne.  I  found  her  and  her  people  to  worship  the  sun,  besides  God  : 
*'  and  Satan  hath  prepared  their  works  for  them,  and  hath  turned  them  aside 
"  from  the  way,  (wherefore  they  are  not  directed)  lest  they  should  worship  God, 
"  who  bringeth  to  light  that  which  is  hidden  in  heaven  and  earth,  and  knoweth 
*'  whatever  they  conceal,  and  whatever  they  discover.  God !  there  js  no  God 
**  but  he  ;  the  Lord  of  the  magnificent  throne.  He  said.  We  shall  see  whether 
"  thou  haat  spoken  the  truth  or  whether  thou  art  a  liar.  Go  with  this  my  letter, 
"  and  cast  it  down  to  them  ;  then  turn  aside  from  them,  and  wait  for  their  an- 


448  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  Hi 

Passing  therefore  this  equivocal  miracle,  if  I  may  call  if 
so,  which  I  imagine  was  of  very  little  use  in  making  prose- 
lytes, whatever  use  it  might  have  had,  in  confirming  and  tu" 
taring  these  already  made  ;  it  may  be  worth  while  to  enquire, 
what  were  the  reasons,  that  an  engine  of  such  amazing  uiflu- 
ence  was  never  employed  by  one  who  assumed  a  character  so 
eminent,  as  the  chief  of  God^s  apostles^  and  the  seal  of  the  prO' 

"svver.  The  queen  said,  O  nobles,  verily  an  honourable  letter  hath  been  deliver- 
"  ed  to  me;  it  is  from  Solomon,  and  this  is  the  tenour  thereof.  In  the  name  of 
"  the  most  nnerciful  God,  rise  not  up  against  me  :  but  come,  and  surrender  yourselves 
"  to  me.  She  said,  O  nobles,  advise  me  in  my  business:  I  will  not  resolve  on 
"  any  thing,  till  ye  be  witness  thereof.  They  answered.  We  are  endued  with 
'•  strength,  and  endued  with  great  prowess  in  war  ;  but  the  command  appertairi- 
"  eth  to  thee:  see  therefore  what  thou  wilt  command.  She  said.  Verily  kings, 
*'  when  they  enter  a  city,  waste  the  same,  and  abase  the  most  powerful  of  the 
"  inhabitants  thereof:  and  so  will  these  do.  But  I  will  send  gifts  to  them  :  and 
"  will  wait  for  what  those  who  shall  be  sent,  shall  bring  back.  And  when  the 
"  ambassadour  came  to  Solomon,  that  prince  said.  Will  ye  present  me  with  rich- 
"  es  ?  Verily  that  which  God  hath  given  me  is  better  tlian  what  he  hath  given 
"you:  but  ye  glory  in  your  gifts.  Return  to  your  people.  We  will  surely  come 
"  to  them  with  forces  which  they  shall  not  be  able  to  withstand ;  and  we  will 
"  drive  them  out  humbled ;  and  they  shall  be  contemptible.  And  Solomon  said, 
"  O  nobles,  which  of  you  will  bring  me  her  throne,  before  they  come  and  sur- 
"  render  themselves  to  me  ?  A  terrible  genius  answered,  I  will  bring  it  thee,  be- 
"  fore  thou  arise  from  thy  place.  And  one  with  whom  was  the  knowledge  of  the 
"  scripture  said,  I  will  bring  it  to  thee,  in  the  twinkling  of  an  eye.  And  when 
"  Solomon  saw  it  placed  before  him,  he  said,  This  is  a  favour  of  my  Lord,  that 
"  he  ma>  make  trial  of  me,  whether  I  will  be  grateful,  or  whether  I  will  be  un- 
"  grateful:  and  he  who  is  grateful,  is  grateful  to  his  own  advantage  ;  but  if  any 
"  shall  be  ungrateful,  verily  my  Lord  is  self-sufficient  and  munificent.  And  he 
*•  said,  Alter  her  throne  that  she  may  not  know  it,  to  the  end  we  may  see  whe- 
"  ther  she  be  directed,  or  whether  she  be  of  those  who  are  not  directed.  And 
•'  when  she  was  come,  it  was  said,  Is  thy  throne  like  this  ?  She  answered,  As 
*'  though  it  were  the  same.  And  we  have  had  knowledge  bestowed  on  us  before 
"  this,  and  have  been  resigned.  But  that  which  she  worshipped  besides  Ood, 
"  had  turned  her  aside,  for  she  was  of  an  unbelieving  people.  It  was  said  to  her, 
"  Enter  the  palace.  And  when  she  saw  it,  she  imagined  it  to  be  a  great  water, 
*'  and  she  discovered  her  legs.  Solomon  sajd.  Verily  this  is  a  palace,  evenly  floor^ 
"  ed  with  glass.  She  said,  O  Lord,  verily  I  have  dealt  unjustly  with  my  own 
"  soul ;  and  I  resign  myself  together  with  Solomon,  to  God,  the  Lord  of  all 
"  creatures."  Thus  poverty  of  sentiment,  monstrosity  of  invention,  which  al- 
ways betokens  a  distempered  not  a  rich  imagination,  and  in  respect  of  diction  the 
most  turgid  verbosity,  so  apt  to  be  mistaken  by  persons  of  a  vitiated  taste  for  true 
sublimity,  are  the  genuine  characteristicks  of  the  book.  They  appear  almost  in 
every  line.  The  very  titles  and  epithets  assigned  to  God  not  exempt  from  them. 
The  Lord  of  the  daybreak,  the  Lord  of  the  magnificent  throne,  the  King  of  the 
day  of  judgment,  Is'c.  They  are  pompous  and  insignificant.  If  the  language  of 
the  Alcoran,  as  the  Mahometans  pretend,  is  indeed  the  language  of  God,  the 
thoughts  are  but  too  evidently  the  thoughts  of  men.  The  reverse  of  this  is  the 
character  of  the  Bible.  When  God  speaks  to  men,  it  is  reasonable  to  think  that 
he  addresses  them  in  their  own  language.  In  the  Bible  you  will  find  nothing  in- 
flated, nothing  afiected  in  the  style.  The  words  are  human,  but  the  sentiments 
are  divine.  Accordingly  there  is  perhaps  no  book  in  the  world,  as  hath  been  of- 
ten justly  observed,  which  suffers  less  by  a  literal  translation  into  any  other  lan- 
guage. 


Sect.  2.  GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  449 

phtt.-i  ?  Was  it  the  want  of  address  to  manage  an  impositioa 
of  this  nature  ?  None  who  knows  the  history  of  this  extraor- 
dinary personage,  will  suspect  that  he  wanted  either  the  geni- 
us to  contrive,  or  the  resolution  and  dexterity  to  execute,  any 
practicable  expedient  for  promoting  his  grand  design  ;  which 
was  no  less  than  that  extensive  despotism,  both  religious  and 
political,  he  at  length  acquired.  Was  it  that  he  had  too  much 
honesty  to  concert  and  carry  on  so  gross  an  artifice  ?  1  hose 
who  believe  him  to  have  been  an  impostor  in  pretending  a  di- 
vine mission,  will  hardly  suspect  him  of  such  delicacy  in  the 
methods  he  would  take  to  accomplish  his  aim.  But  in  fact 
there  is  no  colour  of  reason  for  such  a  suggestion.  There 
was  no  prodigy,  no  miraculous  interposition,  which  he  hesi- 
tated to  give  out,  however  extravagant  when  he  saw  it  would 
contribute  to  his  ends.  Prodigies  of  which  they  had  no  other 
evidence  but  his  own  allegation,  he  knew  his  adversaries  might 
deny^  but  could  not  t/z.9/?roye.  His  scruples  therefore,  we  may 
well  conclude,  proceeded  not  from  probity^  but  from  prudence; 
and  were  solely  against  such  miracles,  as  must  be  subjected 
to  the  scrutmy  of  other  people's  senses.  Was  it  that  miracle- 
working  had  before  that  time  become  so  stale  a  device,  that 
instead  of  gaining  him  the  admiration  of  his  countrymen,  it 
would  have  exposed  him  to  their  laughter  and  contempt?  The 
ihost  cursory  perusal  of  the  Alcoran,  will,  to  every  man  of 
sense,  afford  an  unanswerable  confutation  of  this  hypothesis.* 

*  It  it  observable,  that  Mahomet  was  very  much  harassed  by  the  demands  and 
reasonings  of  his  opposers  with  regard  to  miracles.  They  were  so  far  from  des- 
pising this  evidence,  that  they  considered  the  power  of  working  miracles  as  a  ne- 
ver-failing badge  of  tl\e  prophetical  office  ;  and  therefore  often  assured  him,  by 
the  most  solemn  oaths  and  protestations,  tliat  they  would  submit  implicitly  to  his 
guidance  in  religion,  if  he  would  once  gratify  them  in  this  particular.  This  artful 
roan,  who  doth  not  seem  to  liave  been  of  the  same  o[)inion  with  the  essayist,  that 
it  was  easy  for  cunning  and  impudence  to  impose,  in  a  matter  of  this  kind,  on 
the  credulity  of  the  multitude,  even  though  an  ignorant  and  barbarous  multitude, 
absolutely  refused  to  subject  his  mission  to  so  hazardous  a  trial.  There  is  no  sub- 
ject he  more  frequently  recurs  to  in  his  Alcoran,  being  greatly  interested  to  re- 
move tlie  doubts,  which  were  raised  in  the  minds  of  many  by  his  disclaiming  this 
power  ;  a  power  which  till  then  had  ever  been  looked  upon  as  the  prerogative  of 
the  prophets.  The  following  are  some  of  the  reasons,  with  which  he  endea- 
vours tosatisfy  the  people  on  this  head.  1st,  The  soniertfignty  of  God,  who  is  not 
to  be  called  to  account  for  what  he  gives  or  withholds.  2d,  The  usefulness  of 
miracles,  because  every  man  is  foreordained  either  to  believe,  or  to  remain  in  un- 
belief; and  this  decree  no  miracles  could  alter.  3d,  The  experienced  iriejicacy  o£ 
miracles  in  former  times.  4th,  The  mercy  of  God,  who  had  denied  them  this 
evideiice,  because  the  sin  of  their  incredulity,  in  case  he  had  granted  it,  would 
have  been  so  heinous,  that  he  could  not  have  respited  or  tolerated  theiri  any  longer. 
5th,  The  abuse  to  which  miracles  would  have  been  exposed  from  the  infidels,  who 
would  have  either  charged  them  with  imposture,  or  imputed  them  to  magick.    See 

the  chapters cf  cattle, of  thunder,— —of  AU  Hejir, of  liie  night- 

jourftey>— — jf  the  spider,' of  the  prophets. 

L  1  1 


4^0  '^HE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  II. 

Lastly,  was  it  that  he  lived  in  an  enlightened  age,  and 
amongst  a  civilized  and  learned  people,  who  were  too  quick- 
sighted  to  be  deceived  by  tricks,  which  among  barbarians 
might  have  produced  the  most  astonishing  effects  ?  Quite  the 
reverse.  He  lived  in  a  barbarous  age,  and  amongst  an  illite- 
rate people,  with  whom,  if  with  any,  he  had  reason  to  be- 
lieve the  grossest  deceit  would  have  proved  successful. 

What  pity  was  it,  that  Mahomet  had  not  a  counsellor  so 
deeply  versed  in  human  nature  as  the  essayist,  who  could  have 
assured  him,  that  there  needed  but  effrontery  and  enterprise  ; 
that  with  these  auxiliaries  he  had  reason  to  hope  the  most  im- 
pudent pretences  would  be  crowned  with  success  ?  The  too 
timid  prophet  would  doubtless  have  remonstrated  against  this 
spirited  counstl^  insisting,  that  it  was  one  thing  to  satisfy 
friends^  and  another  thing  to  silence  or  convert  enemies  ;  that 
it  was  one  thing  to  impose  on  men's  intellects^  and  another 
thing  to  deceive  their  .sf;^*^^ ;  that  though  an  attempt  of  the 
last  kind  should  succeed  with  some,  yet  if  the  fraud  were  de- 
tected by  any,  and  he  might  expect  that  his  adversaries  would 
exert  themselves  in  order  to  detect  it,  the  whole  mystery  of 
craft  would  be  divulged,  his  friends  would  become  suspicious, 
and  the  spectators  of  such  pretended  miracles  would  become 
daily  more  prying  and  critical ;  that  the  consequences  would 
infallibly  prove  fatal  to  the  whole  design  ;  and  that  therefore 
such  a  cheat  was  on  no  account  whatever  to  be  risked.  To 
this  niethinks  I  hear  the  other  replying  with  some  earnestness, 
'  Make  but  the  trial,  and  you  will  certainly  find,  that  what 
'  judgment,  nay  and  what  senses  your  auditors  have,  they  will 

*  renounce  by  principle  in  those  sublime  and  mysterious  sub- 
'  jects  ;  they  will  imagine  they  see  and  hear  what  has  no  reality, 
'  nay  whatever  you  shall  desire  that  they  should  see  and  hear. 
'  Their  credulity  (forgive  a  freedom   which  my  zeal  inspires) 

*  will  increase  your  impudence,  and  your  impudence  will  over- 

*  power  their  credulity.  The  smallest  spark  may  here  kindle 
'  into  the  greatest  llame  ;   because   the   materials  are  always 

*  prepared   for    it.     The    avidum  genus   auricidarum  swallow 

*  greedily,  without  examination,  whatever  sooths  superstition 
'  and  promotes  wonder.'  Whether  the  judicious  reader  will 
reckon  that  the  prophet  or  his  counsellor  would  have  had  the 
better  in  this  debate,  I  shall  not  take  upon  me  to  decide.  One 
perhaps  (if  I  might  be  indulged  in  a  conjecture)  whose  notions 
are  founded  in  metaphysical  refinements,  or  whose  resolutions 
are  influenced  by  oratorical  declamation,  will  incline  to  the 
opinion  of  the  latter.  One  whose  sentiments  are  the  result 
of  a  practical  knowledge  of  mankind,  will  probably  subscribe 
to  the  judgment  of  the  former,  and  Avill  allow,  that  in  this  iii- 


Sect.  2.  GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  451 

stance  the  captain-general  and  prophet  of  Islamism  acted 
the  more  prudent  part. 

Shall  we  then  say,  that  it  was  a  more  obscure  theatre  on 
which  Jesus  Christ  appeared  ?  Were  his  spectators  more  ig- 
norant^ or  less  adverse  P  The  contrary  of  both  is  manifest.  It 
may  indeed  be  affirmed  with  truth,  that  the  religion  of  the 
wild  Arabs  was  more  repugnant  to  the  doctrine  of  Mahomet, 
than  the  religious  dogmas  of  the  Jews  were  to  those  of  Jesus. 
But  we  shall  err  egregiously,  if  we  conclude  thence,  that  to 
this  repugnancy  the  repugnancy  of  disposition  in  the  professors 
of  these  religions  must  be  proportionate.  It  is  a  fine  obser- 
vation of  the  most  piercing  and  comprehensive  genius,  which 
hath  appeared  in  this  age,  That  "  though  men  have  a  very 
**  strong  tendency  to  idolatry,  they  are  nevertheless  but  little 
**  attached  to  idolatrous  religions  ;  that  though  they  have  no 
*'  great  tendency  to  spiritual  ideas,  they  are  nevertheless 
t\  strongly  attached  to  religions  which  enjoin  the  adoration  of 
**  a  spiritual  being*."  Hence  an  attachment  in  Jews,  Chris- 
tians, and  Mahometans  to  their  respective  religions,  which 
was  never  displayed  by  polytheists  of  any  denomination. 
But  its  spirituality  was  not  the  only  cause  of  adherence  which 
the  Jews  had  to  their  religion.  Every  physical,  every  moral 
motive  concurred  in  that  people  to  rivet  their  attachment,  and 
make  them  oppose  with  violence,  whatever  bore  the  face  of 
innovation.  Their  religion  and  polity  were  so  blended  as 
scarce  to  be  distinguishable  :  this  engaged  their  patriotism. 
They  were  selected  of  God  preferably  to  other  nations  :  this 
inflamed  their  pride\.  They  were  all  under  one  spiritual 
head,  the  highpriest,  and  had  their  solemn  festivals  celebrated 
in  one  temple  :  this  strengthened  their  union.  The  ceremo- 
nies of  their  publick  worship  were  magnificent :  this  flattered 
their  senses.  These  ceremonies  also  were  numerous,  and  oc- 
cupied a  great  part  of  their  time  :  this,  to  all  the  other  grounds 
of  attachment,  superadded  the  force  o{  habit.  On  the  contrary, 
the  simplicity  of  the  gospel,  as  well  as  the  spirit  of  humility^ 
and  moderation^  and  charity^  and  universality^  (if  I  mav  be  al- 
lowed that  term)  which  it  breathed,  could  not  fail  to  alarm  a 
people  of  such  a  cast,  and  awaken,  as  in  fact  it  did,  the  most 
furious  opposition.  Accordingly,  Christianity  had  fifty  times 
more  success  amongst  idolaters,  than  it  had  among  the  Jews. 
I  am  therefore  warranted  to  assert,  that  if  the  miracles  of  our 
Lord  and  his  apostles  had  been  an  imposture,  there  could  not 

•  De  I'esprit  des  loix,  liv.  25.  chap.  2. 

j"  How  great  influence  this  motive  had,  appears  from  Luke  iv.  ''25.  Isfc-  and 
yjrom  Acts  xxii.  21,  22. 


452  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Fait  II. 

on  the  face  of  the  earth,  have  been  chosen  for  exhibiting  them, 
a  more  unfavourable  theatre  than  Judea.  .  On  the  other  hand^ 
had  it  been  any  where  practicable,  by  a  display-  of  false  won- 
ders, to  make  converts  to  a  new  religion,  no  where  could  a 
project  of  this  iiature  have  been  conducted  with  greater  pro- 
bability of  success  than  in  Arabia'  So  much  for  the  contrast 
there  is  betwixt  the  Christian  Messiah  and  the  orphan 
CHARGE  of  Abu  Taleb.  So  plain  it  is,  that  the  mosque  yields 
entirely  the  plea  of  miracles  to  the  f^ynagogue  and  the  church. 
But  from  Heathens  and  Mahomei  ans,  let  us  turn  our  eyes 
to  the  Christian  world.  Fhe  only  object  here,  which  merits 
our  attention,  as  coming  under  the  denomination  of  miracleg 
ascribed  to  a  new  system,  and  as  what  maybe  thought  to  rival 
in  credibility  the  miracles  of  the  gospel,  are  those  said  lo  have 
been  performed  in  the  primitive  churchy  after  the  times  of  the 
apostles,  and  after  the  finishing  of  the  sacred  canon,  i  hese 
will  probably  be  ascribed  to  a  new  system,  since  Christianity, 
for  some  centuries,  was  not  (as  the  phrase  is)  establiahed^  or 
(to  speak  more  properly)  corrupted  by  human  authority  ;  and 
since  even  after  such  establishment,  there  remained  long  in 
the  empire  a  considerable  mixture  of  idolaters.  We  have  the 
greater  reason  here  to  consider  this  topick,  as  it  hath  of  late 
been  the  subject  of  very  warm  dispute,  and  as  the  cause  of 
Christianity  itself  (which  I  conceive  is  totally  distinct)  seems 
to  have  been  strangely  confounded  with  it.  From  the  manner 
in  which  the  argument  hath  been  conducted,  who  is  there  that 
would  not  conclude  that  both  must  stand  or  fall  together  ?  No- 
thing however  can  be  more  groundless,  nothing  more  injuri- 
ous to  the  religion  of  Jesus,  than  such  a  conclusion. 

The  learned  writer  who  hath  given  rise  to  this  controversv, 
not  only  acknowledges,  that  the  falsity  of  the  miracles  men- 
tioned by  the  fathers,  is  no  evidence  of  the  falsity  of  the  mira- 
cles recorded  in  scripture,  but  that  there  is  even  a  presumption 
in  favour  of  these,  arising  from  those  forgeries,  which  he  pre- 
tends to  have  detected*.  The  justness  of  the  remark  contain- 
ed in  this  acknowledgment,  will  appear  more  clearly  from  the 
following  obsei'vations. 

Let  it  be  observed,  first,  that  supposing  numbers  of  people 
are  ascertained  of  the  truth  of  some  miracles,  whether  their 
conviction  arise  from  sense  or  from  testimony,  it  will  surely 
be  admitted  as  a  consequence,  that  in  all  such  persons,  the  pre- 
sumption against  mii'acles  from  uncommonness  must  be 
greatly  diminished,  in  several  perhaps  totally  extinguished. 

*  Dr.  Middleton's  prefatory  discourse  to  liis  letter  from  Rome. 


Sect.  2.         GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  453 

Let  it  be  observed,  secondly,  that  if  true  miracles  have  been 
employed  successfully  in  support  of  certain  religious  tenets, 
this  success  will  naturally  suggest  to  those,  who  are  zealous 
of  propagating  favourite  opinions  in  religion,  to  recur  to  the 
plea  of  miracles,  as  the  most  effectual  expedient  for  accom- 
plishing thv=ir  end.  This  they  will  be  encouraged  to  do  on  a 
double  account :  firsts  they  know,  that  people  from  recent  ex- 
perience, are  made  to  expect  such  a  confirmation ;  secondly^ 
they  know,  that  in  consequence  of  this  experience,  the  incredi- 
bility, which  is  the  principal  obstruction  to  such  an  undertak- 
ing, is  in  a  manner  removed  :  and  there  is,  on  the  contrary,  as 
in  such  circumstances  there  certainly  would  be,  a  promptness 
in  the  generality  to  receive  them. 

Add  to  these,  that  if  we  consult  the  history  of  mankind, 
or  even  our  own  experience,  we  shall  be  convinced,  that  hardly 
hath  one  wonderful  event  actually  happened  in  any  country^ 
even  where  there  have  not  been  such  visible  temptations  to 
forgery,  which  hath  not  given  rise  to  false  rumours  of  other 
ev^ents  similar,  but  still  more  wonderful.  Hardly  hath  any 
person  or  people  achieved  some  exploits  truly  extraordinarj',  to 
whom  common  report  hath  not  quickly  attributed  many  others, 
as  extraordinary  at  least,  if  not  impossible.  A.%fame  may,  ia 
this  respect,  be  compared  to  a  multiplying  glaas^  reasonable 
people  almost  always  conclude  in  the  same  way  concerning 
both  ;  we  know  that  there  is  not  a  real  object  corresponding  to 
every  appearance  exhibited,  at  the  same  time  we  know  that 
there  must  be  some  objects  to  give  rise  to  the  appearances. 

I  should  therefore  only  beg  of  our  adversaries,  that,  for 
argument's  sake,  they  will  suppose  that  the  mii'acles  related  in 
the  New  Testament  were  really  performed ;  and  then,  that 
they  will  candidly  tell  us,  what,  according  to  their  notions  of 
human  nature,  would,  in  all  likelihood,  have  been  the  conse- 
quences. They  must  be  very  partial  to  a  darling  hypothesis^ 
or  little  acquainted  with  the  world,  who  will  hesitate  to  own^ 
that,  on  this  supposition,  it  is  not  barely  probable,  but  certain^ 
that  for  a  few  endowed  with  the  miraculous  power,  there  would 
soon  have  arisen  numbers  of  pretenders  ;  that  from  some  mi- 
racles well  attested,  occasion  would  have  been  taken  to  propa- 
gate innumerable  false  reports.  If  so,  with  what  colour  of 
justice  can  the  detection  of  many  spurious  reports  among  the 
primitive  Christians  be  considered  as  a  presumption  against 
those  miracles,  the  reality  of  which  is  the  most  plausible  ;  nay 
the  only  plausible  account  that  can  be  given  of  the  origin  of 
such  reports  ?  The  presumption  is  too  evidently  on  the  oppo- 
site side  to  need  illustration. 


454>  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  II. 

^ttt  is  not  my  intention  here  to  patronize  either  side  of  the 

question  which  the  Doctor's  Free  inquiry  hath  occasioned. 
All  that  concerns  my  argument  is,  barely  to  evince,  and  this  I 
imagine  hath  been  evinced,  that  granting  the  Doctor's  plea  to 
be  well  founded,  there  is  no  presumption  arising  hence,  which 
tends  in  the  lowest  degree  to  discredit  the  miracles  recorded 
in  holy  writ ;  nay,  that  there  is  a  contrary  presumption.  In 
further  confirmation  of  this  truth,  let  me  ask,  Were  there  ever, 
in  any  region  of  the  globe,  any  similar  pretensions  to  miracu- 
lous powers,  before  that  memorable  era,  the  publication  of  the 
gospel  ?  Let  me  ask  again.  Since  those  pretensions  ceased, 
hath  it  ever  been  in  the  power  of  the  most  daring  enthusiast, 
to  revive  them  any  where  in  favour  of  a  new  system  ?  An- 
thentick  miracles  will,  for  a  time,  give  a  currency  to  counter- 
feits ;  but  as  the  former  become  less  frequent,  the  latter  become 
more  suspected,  till  at  length  they  are  treated  with  general 
contempt,  and  disappear.  The  danger  then  is,  lest  men,  ever 
prone  to  extremes,  become  as  extravagantly  incredulous,  as 
formerly  they  were  credulous.  Laziness,  the  true  source  of 
both,  always  inclines  us  to  admit  or  reject  in  the  gross,  without 
entering  on  the  irksome  task  of  considering  things  in  detail. 
In  the  first  instance,  knowing  some  such  events  to  be  true,  they 
admit  all  without  examination  ;  in  the  second,  knowing  some  to 
be  false,  they  reject  all  -without  examination.  A  procedure 
this,  which  however  excusable  in  the  unthinking  herd,  is  alto- 
gether unworthy  a  philosopher. 

But  it  maybe  thought,  that  the  claim  to  miracles  in  the  early 
ages  of  the  church,  continued  too  long  to  be  supported  solely 
on  the  credit  of  those  performed  by  our  Lord  and  his  apostles. 
In  order  to  account  for  this,  it  ought  to  be  attended  to,  that  in 
the  course  of  some  centuries,  the  situation  of  affairs,  with 
regard  to  religion,  was  really  inverted.  Education,  and  even 
superstition,  and  bigotry,  and  popularity,  which  the  miracles  of 
Christ  and  his  apostles  had  to  encounter,  came  gradually  to  be 
on  the  side  of  those  wonders,  said  to  have  been  performed  in 
after  times.  If  they  were  potent  enemies,  and  such  as  we 
have  reason  to  believe  nothing  but  the  force  of  truth  could 
vanquish  ;  they  were  also  potent  allies,  and  may  well  be  sup- 
posed able  to  give  a  temporary  triumph  to  falsehood,  especially 
when  it  had  few  or  no  enemies  to  combat.  But  in  discoursing 
on  the  prodigies  said  to  have  been  performed  in  primitive 
times,  I  have  been  insensibly  carried  from  the  point,  to  which 
I  proposed  in  this  section  to  confine  myself.  From  inquiring 
into  miracles  ascribed  to  new  systems,   I  have  proceeded  to 

•>  those  pleaded  in  confirmation  of  systems  previously  established 

'■"  and  generally  received. 


Sect.  2.        GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  455 

Leaving  so  remote  a  period,  I  propose,  lastly,  to  inquire, 
whether,  since  that  time,  any  heresiarch  whatever,  any  founder 
of  a  new  sect,  or  publisher  of  a  new  system,  hath  pretended 
to  miraculous  powers.  If  the  essayist  had  known  of  any 
such  pretender,  he  surely  would  have  mentioned  him.  But  as 
he  hath  not  afforded  us  any  light  on  this  subject,  1  shall  just 
recall  to  the  remembrance  of  my  reader,  those  persons  who, 
either  as  innovators  or  reformers,  have  made  some  figure  in 
the  church.  They  were  the  persons  from  whom,  if  from  any, 
a  plea  of  this  kind  might  naturally  have  been  expected  ;  espe- 
cially at  a  time  when  Europe  was  either  plunged  in  barbarism, 
or  but  beginning  to  emerge  out  of  it. 

Was  ever  then  this  high  prerogative,  the  power  of  working 
miracles,  claimed  or  exercised  by  the  founders  of  the  sects  of 
the  Waldenses  and  Albigenses  ?  Did  Wickliff  in  England 
pretend  to  it  ?  Did  Huss  or  Jerom  in  Bohemia  ?  To  come 
nearer  modern  times.  Did  Luther  in  Germany,  Zuinglius  in 
Switzerland,  Calvin  in  France,  or  any  other  of  the  reformers, 
advance  this  plea  ?  Do  such  of  them  as  are  authors,  mention 
in  their  writings  any  miracles  they  performed,  or  appeal  to 
them  as  the  evidences  of  their  doctrine?  Do  contemporary 
historians  allege,^  that  they  challenged  the  faith  of  their  au- 
ditors, in  consequence  of  such  supernatural  powers  ?  I  admit, 
if  they  did,  that  their  miracles  might  be  ascribed  to  a  new  sys- 
tem. For  though  they  pretended  only  to  re-establish  the 
Christian  institution,  in  its  native  purity,  expunging  those  per- 
nicious interpolations,  which  a  false  philosophy  had  foisted  into 
the  doctrinal  part,  and  Pagan  superstition  into  the  moral  and 
the  ritual ;  yet  as  the  religion  they  inculcated,  greatly  differed 
from  the  faith  and  worship  of  the  times,  it  might,  in  this  re- 
spect, be  denominated  a  new  system  ;  and  v.  ould  be  encoun- 
tered by  all  the  violence  and  prejudice,  which  novelties  in  reli- 
gion never  fail  to  excite.  Not  that  the  want  of  real  miracles 
was  presumption  against  the  truth  of  their  doctrine.  The 
God  of  nature,  who  is  the  God  of  Christians,  does  nothing  in 
vain.  No  new  revelation  was  pretended  to;  consequently 
there  was  no  occasion  for  such  supernatural  support.  They 
appealed  to  the  revelation  formerly  bestowed,  and  by  all  par- 
ties acknowledged,  as  to  the  proper  rule  in  this  controversy, 
they  appealed  to  the  reason  of  mankind  as  the  judge  ;  and  the 
reason  of  mankind  was  a  competent  judge  of  the  conformity 
of  their  doctrine  to  this  unerring  rule. 

But  how,  upon  the  author's  principles,  shall  we  account  for 
this  moderation  in  the  reformers  ?  Were  they,  in  his  judg- 
ment, calm  inquirers  into  truth  ?  Were  they  dispassionate 
reusoners  in  defence  of  it  ?  Far  otherwise.   He  tells  us,  "  They 


456  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  II. 

*♦  aiay  safely  be  pronounced  to  have  been  universally  inflamed 
"  with  the  highest  enthusiasm  *."  And  doubtless  we  cannot 
expect  from  this  hand  a  more  amiable  picture  of  their  disci- 
ples. May  not  we  then,  in  our  turn,  safely  pronounce,  this 
writer  himself  being  judge,  that  for  a  man  to  imagine  he  sees 
-what  hath  no  reality,  to  impose  in  this  manner  not  only  on  his 
own  understanding,  but  even  on  his  external  senses,  is  a  pitch 
of  delusion  higher  than  the  highest  enthusiasm  can  produce, 
and  is  to  be  imputed  only  to  downright  frenzyj-  ? 
-'  Since  the  world  began,  there  hath  not  appeared  a  more  ges- 
neral  propension  to  the  wildest  fanaticism,  a  greater  degree  of 
credulity  in  every  claim  that  was  made  to  the  illapses  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  or  more  thorough  contempt  of  all  established 
modes  of  worship,  than  appeared  in  this  island  about  the 
middle  of  the  last  century.  It  is  astonishing,  that  when  the 
minds  of  men  were  intoxicated  with  enthusiasm  ;  when  every 
new  pretender  to  divine  illuminations  was  quickly  surrounded 
by  a  crowd  of  followers,  and  his  most  incoherent  effusions 
greedily  swallowed  as  the  dictates  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  that 
in  such  a  Babel  of  sectaries,  none  are  to  be  found,  who  ad- 
vanced a  claim  to  the  power  of  working  miracles  ;  a  claim 
'^rhich,  in  the  author's  opinion,  though  false,  is  easily  support- 

*  Hist,  of  Great  Britain,  James  I.  chap.  1. 
'  f  Perhaps  it  will  be  pleaded  that  the  working  of  miracles  was  considered  by  the 
leaders  in  the  reformation  as  a  Popish  artifice,  and  as  therefore  worthy  of  being 
discarded  with  the  other  abuses  which  Popery  had  introduced.  That  this  was 
not  the  light  in  which  miracles  were  viewed  by  I.uther,  who  justly  possesses  the 
rirst  place  in  the  list  of  reformers,  is  evident  from  the  manner  in  which  he  argues 
against  Muncer,  the  apostle  of  the  Anabaptists.  This  man,  without  ordination, 
had  assumed  the  office  of  a  Christian  pastor.  Against  this  conduct  Luther  re- 
monstrates, as  being  in  his  judgment,  an  usiu-patipn  of  the  sacred  function. 
"  Let  him  be  asked,"  says  he,  *'  Who  made  him  teacher  of  religion  ?  If  he  an- 
*'  swers,  God  ;  let  him  prove  it  by  a  visible  miracie:  for  it  is  by  such  signs  that  God 
"  declares  himself,  when  he  gives  an  extraordinary  mission."  When  this  argu- 
ment was  afterwards  retorted  on  himself  by  the  Romanists,  who  desired  to  know 
Jiow  his  own  vocation,  originally  limited  and  dependent,  had  become  not  only 
,',ijnlimited,  but  quite  independent  of  the  hierarchy,  from  which  he  had  received  it; 
his  reply  was,  Tiiat  the  intrepidity,  with  which  he  had  been  enabled  to  brave  So 
raany  dangers,  and  the  nuccess  with  which  his  enterprise  had  been  crowned, 
ought  to  be  regarded  as  miraculous  :  And  indeed  most  of  his  followers  were  of 
this  opinion.  But  whether  this  opinion  w^as  errjneous,  or  whether  the  argument 
"against  Muncer  was  conclusive,  it  is  not  my  business  to  inquire.  Thus  much  is 
^evident  from  the  story  :  first,  That  this  reformer,  far  from  rejecting  miracles  as  a 
rllomish  trick,  acknowledged,  that  in  some  religious  questions,  they  are  the  only 
medium  of  jjroof ;  secondly.  That  notwithstanding  this,  he  never  attempted,  by  a 
show  of  miracles,  to  impose  on  the  senses  of  his  hearers  ;  (if  they  were  deceived 
in  thinking  that  his  success  and  magnanimity  were  miraculous,  it  was  not  their 
senses,  but  their  understanding  that  was  deceived)  ;  lastly.  That  the  Anabaptists 
themselves,  though  perhaps  the  most  outrageous  fanatic<xs  that  ever  existed,  did 

not  pretend  to  the  power  of  working  miracles^^ Sleidan,  lib.  5,  LutA.  De  votis 

mmast.  '<:^i.  Epist.  ad  Frid,  Sax.  Dacem,  a^.  Chytraeum. 


$tdt,  ^        GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  W 

td,  and  wonderfully  successful^  especially  among  enthusiasts* 
Yet  to  Mr.  Hume  himself,  who  hath  written  the  history  o^ 
that  period,  and  who  will  not  be  accused  of  neglecting  to  mark 
the  extravagances  effected  by  enthusiasm,  I  appeal  whether 
this  remark  be  just. 

Will  it  be  alleged  as  an  exception  that  one  or  two  frantick 
people  among  the  Quakers,  not  the  leaders  of  the  party,  did 
actually  pretend  to  such  a  power  ?  Let  it  be  remenabered,  that 
this  conduct  had  no  other  consequences,  but  to  bring  upon  the 
i>retendjrs  such  a  general  contempt,  as  in  that  fanatical  and 
gloomy  age,  the  most  unintelligible  jargon  or  glaring  nonsense 
Would  never  have  been  able  to  produce. 

Will  it  be  urged  by  the  essayist,  that  even  itt  the  beginning^ 
of  the  present  century,  this  plea  was  revived  in  Britain  by  the 
French  prophets,  a  set  of  poor  visionaries,  who,  by  the  barba* 
rity  with  which  they  had  been  treated  in  their  oWn  country, 
had  been  wrought  up  to  madness,  before  they  took  refuge  in 
this  ?  I  must  beg  leave  to  remind  him,  that  it  is  manifest,  froiik 
ifhe  history  of  those  delirious  and  unhappy  creatures,  that  by 
DO  part  of  their  conduct  did  they  so  effectually  open  the  eyeh 
of  mankind  naturally  credulous,  discredit  their  own  inspira* 
tions,  and  ruin  their  cause,  as  by  this,  not  less  foolish  than  pre- 
sumptuous pretence.  Accordingly  they  are  perhaps  the  only 
6ect,  which  hath  sprung  up  so  lately,  made  so  great  a  bustle  fot 
a  while,  and  which  is  nevertheless  at  this  day  totally  extinct. 
It  deserves  also  to  be  remarked  concerning  this  people,  that 
though  they  were  mad  enough  to  imagine  that  they  could  re* 
Store  a  dead  man  to  life  ;  nay  though  they  proceeded  so  far, 
CIS  to  determine  and  announce  beforehand  the  day  and  the  hour 
of  his  resurrection ;  yet  none  of  them  were  so  distracted^  ^ 
t!b  imagine,  that  they  had  seen  him  rise  ;  not  one  of  them  after- 
Wards  pretended,  that  their  prediction  had  been  fulfilled.  Thus 
'iHven  a  frenzy,  which  had  quite  disordered  their  intellects, 
could  not  in  this  instance  overpower  their  senses. 

Upon  the  whole,  therefore,  till  some  contrary  example  is 
produced  I  may  warrantably  conclude, — that  the  religion  df 
tJte  BiiLfi  is  the  only  religion  extant,  which  claims  to  have 
been  recommended  by  the  evidence  of  miracles  ; — that  though 
in  diiOferent  ages  and  countries,  numberless  enthusiasts  have 
itisen,  extremely  few  have  dared  to  advance  this  plea ; — ^that 
■^^herever  any  have  had  the  boldness  to  recur  to  it,  it  hath 
JjTOved  the  bane,  and  not  the  support,  of  their  cause.  Thus  it 
hath  been  evinced,  as  was  proposed,  that  there  is  no  presump- 
tion arising  from  the  history  of  the  worlds  which  can  in  the 
least  invalidate  the  argument  from  miracles,  in  defence  of 
Chriiitianity. 

M  m  m 


458  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  II. 

SECTION  III. 

No  miracles  recorded  by  historians  of  other  religions  are  subver- 
sive of  the  evidence  arising  from  the  rniracles  wrought  in 
proof  of  Christianity y  or  can  be  considered  as  contrary  testi' 
mony» 

W  HY  is  a  miracle  regarded  as  evidence  of  a  religious 
'  doctrine  ?'  Or,  *  What  connexion   is  there  between   an  act 

*  of  power  admitted  to  be  supernatural,  and  the  truth  of  a  pro- 

*  position  pronounced  by  the  person  who  exerts  that  power?' 
These  are  questions,  which  some  of  our  infidels  have  exulted 
in  as  unanswerable  :  and  they  are  questions,  which  it  is  proper 
to  examine  a  little  ;  not  so  much  for  their  own  sake,  as  because 
a  satisfactory  answer  to  them  may  throw  light  on  the  subject 
of  this  section. 

A  man,  I  suppose,  of  an  unblemished  character,  advanieth 
doctrines  in  religion,  unknown  before,  but  not  in  themselves 
apparently  impious  or  absurd.  We  interrogate  him  about 
the  manner  wherein  he  attained  the  knowledge  of  those  doc- 
trines. He  affirms.  That  by  no  process  of  reasoning,  nor  in 
any  other  natural  way,  did  he  discover  them  ;  but  that  they 
were  revealed  to  him  by  the  Spirit  of  God.  It  must  be  owned, 
there  is  a  very  strong  presumption  against  the  truth  of  what 
he  says;  and  it  is  of  consequence  to  inquire,  whence  that 
presumption  ariseth.  It  is  not  primarily  from  any  doubt  of 
the  man's  integrity.  If  the  fact  he  related,  were  of  an  ordinary 
nature,  the  reputation  he  has  hitherto  maintained  would  se- 
cure him  from  being  suspected  of  an  intended  deceit.  It  is 
not  from  any  absurdity  or  immoral  tendency  we  perceive  in 
the  doctrine  itself.  It  ariseth  principally,  if  not  solely  from 
these  two  circumstances,  the  extreme  uncommonness  of  such 
Si  revelation,  and  the  great  facility  with  which  people  of  strong 
fancy,  may  in  this  particular  impose  upon  themselves.  The 
man,  I  supposed,  acquaints  us  further,  that  God,  when  he 
communicated  to  him  the  truths  he  publishes,  communicated 
also  the  power  of  working  miracles  ;  such  as,  of  giving  sight 
to  the  blind,  and  hearing  to  the  deaf,  of  raising  the  dead,  and 
making  whole  the  maimed.  It  is  evident,  that  we  have  pre- 
cisely the  same  presumption  against  his  being  endued  with 
such  a  power,  as  against  his  having  obtained  such  a  revelation. 
Two  things  are  asserted  :  there  is  one  presumption,  and  but 
one,  against  them  ;  and  it  equally  affects  them  both.  What- 
ever proves  either  assertion,  removes  the  only  presumption 


Sect.  3.        GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  45$ 

which  hinders  our  belief  of  the  other.  The  man,  I  suppose, 
lastly,  performs  the  miracles  before  us,  which  he  said  he  was 
commissioned  to  perform.  We  can  no  longer  doubt  of  a  su- 
pernatural communication.  We  have  now  all  the  evidence 
which  the  integrity  of  the  person  could  give  us,  as  to  an  ordi- 
nary event  attested  by  him,  that  the  doctrine  he  delivers  as 
from  God,  is  from  God,  and  therefore  true. 

Nay,  we  have  more  evidence  than  for  any  common  fact, 
vouched  by  a  person  of  undoubted  probity.  As  God  is  both 
almighty  and  all-wise,  if  he  hath  bestowed  on  any  so  uncom- 
mon a  privilege,  it  is  highly  probable,  that  it  is  bestowed  for 
promoting  some  end  uncommonly  important.  And  what 
more  important  end  than  to  reveal  to  men  that  which  may  be 
conducive  to  their  present  and  eternal  happiness  ?  It  may  be 
said.  That,  at  most,  it  can  only  prove  the  interposal  of  some 
power  superiour  to  human  :  the  being  who  interposeth  is  per- 
haps a  bad  being,  and  intends  to  deceive  us.  This  it  may  be 
allowed,  is  possible;  but  the  other  is  probable.  Y or ^  Jirst^ 
From  the  light  of  nature,  we  have  no  positive  evidence  of  the 
existence  of  such  intermediate  beings,  good  or  bad.  Their 
existence  is  therefore  only  possible.  Of  the  existence  and 
perfections  of  God,  we  have  the  highest  moral  assurance. 
Secondly^  If  there  were  such  beings,  that  raising  the  dead,  and 
giving  sight  to  the  blind,  should  come  within  the  verge  of 
their  power,  is  also  but  possible  ;  that  they  are  within  the 
sphere  of  omnipotence  is  certain.  Thirdly^  Whatever  seems 
to  imply  a  suspension  of  any  of  the  established  laws  of  nature, 
we  may  presume,  with  great  appearance  of  reason,  proceeds 
from  the  author  of  nature,  either  immediately,  or  which 
amounts  to  the  same  thing  mediately :  that  is,  by  the  interven- 
tion of  some  agent  impowered  by  him.  To  all  these  there 
will  also  accrue  presumptions,  not  only,  as  was  hinted  already, 
from  the  character  of  the  preacher,  but  from  the  apparent  ten- 
dency of  the  doctrine,  and  from  the  effect  it  produceth  on  those 
who  receive  it.  And  now  the  connexion  between  the  miracle 
and  the  doctrine  is  obvious.  The  miracle  removes  the  impro- 
bability of  a  supernatural  communication  of  which  it  is  in  fact 
an  irrefragable  evidence.  This  improbability,  which  was  the 
only  obstacle,  being  removed,  the  doctrine  hath,  at  least,  all 
the  evidence  of  a  common  fact,  attested  by  a  man  of  known 
virtue  and  good  sense.  " 

In  order  to  illustrate  this  further,  I  shall  recur  to  the  ftiS. 
stance  I  have  already  had  occasion  to  consider,  of  the  Dutch- 
man and  the  King  of  Siam.  I  shall  suppose,  that,  besides  the 
account  given  by  the  former  of  the  freezing  of  water  in  HoU 
land,  he  had  informed  the  prince  of  the  astonishing  effects 


4^  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THB  P«rtfX|%i 

Ijroduced  by  gunpowder,  with  which  the  latter  had  been  entiren- 
^  unacquainted.  Both  accounts  appear  to  him  alike  incredi* 
ble,  or,  if  you  please,  absolutely  impossible.  Some  time 
afterwards,  the  Dutchman  gets  imported  into  the  kingdom  s^ 
§ufHcient  quantity  qf  gunpowder,  with  the  necessary  artillery, 
J^e  informs  the  monarch  of  this  acquisition  ;  who  having  per- 
mitted him  to  make  experiments  on  some  of  his  cattle  andi^ 
buildings,  perceives,  with  inexpressible  amazement,  that  all 
tt^e  European  had  told  him,  of  the  celerity  and  violence  witi* 
Ijrhith  this  destructive  powder  operates,  is  strictly  conformabli^ 
tp  truth.  I  ask  any  considerate  person.  Would  not  this  ba 
^ppugh  to  restore  the  stranger  to  the  Indian's  good  opinion, 
which,  I  suppose,  his  former  experienced  honesty  had  entitledt 
him  to  ?  Would  it  not  remove  the  incredibility  of  the  account 
l^e  had  given  of  the  freezing  of  water  in  northern  countries  £ 
yet,  if  abstractly  considered,  what  connexion  is  there  betweea^ 
tjje  effects  of  gunpowder  and  the  effects  of  cold  I  But  the  pre^ 
sumption  arising  from  miracles,  in  favour  of  the  doctrine  pub- 
lished by  the  performer,  as  divinely  inspired,  must  be  incom* 
parably  stronger  ;  since,  from  what  hath  been  said,  it  appears 
to  have  several  peculiar  circumstances,  which  add  weight  to 
it.  It  is  evident,  then,  that  miracles  are  a  proper  proof,  and 
perhaps  the  only  proper  proof,  of  a  revelation  from  Heaveij^ 
But  it  is  also  evident,  that  miracles  may  be  wrought  for  other 
purposes,  and  may  not  be  intended  as  proofs  of  any  doctrint 
i^hatso^ver. 

Thus  much  being  premised,  I  shall  examine  another,  verjf 
curious  argument  of  the  essayist :  "  There  is  no  testimony,'' 
says  he,  **  for  any  prodigy-,  that  is  not  opposed  by  an  infinite 
"  number  of  witnesses  ;  so  that  not  only  the  miracle  destroys 
"  the  credit  of  the  testimony,  but  even  the  testimony  destroys 
*'  itself*."  In  order  to  illustrate  this  strange  position,  h« 
observes,  that,  "  in  matters  of  religion,  whatever  is  different 
**  is  contrary;  and  that  it  is  impossible  the  religions  of  ancient 
*'  Rome,  of  Turkey,  of  Siam,  and  of  China,  should  all  of 
*'  thtm  be  established  on  any  solid  foundation.  Every  miracle 
**  therefore  pretended  to  have  been  wrought  in  any  of  these 
*'  religions,  (and  all  of  them  abound  in  miracles)  as  its  direct 
<*  scope  is  to  establish  the  particular  system  to  which  it  is 
"  attributed,  so  it  has  the  same  force,  though  more  indirectlyi 
•'  to  overthrow  every  other  system.  In  destroying  a  rival 
"  system,  it  likewise  destroys  the  credit  of  those  miracles,  on 
<*  which  that  system  was  established  ;  so  that  all  the  prodigies 
"  of  different  religions  are  to  be  regarded  as  contrary  facts, 

*  p.  190,  &c. 


aeGt.S.        GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  461 

"  and  the  evidences  of  these  prodigies,  whether  weak  oc; 
»*  strong,  as  opposite  to  each  other."  Never  did  an  authoi? 
more  artfully  avail  himself  of  indefinite  expressions.  With 
vhat  admirable  sleight  does  he  vary  his  phrases,  so  as  to  make 
the  inadvertent  reader  look  upon  them  as  synonymous,  when 
in  fact  their  significations  are  totally  distinct  ?  Thus  what,  by 
a   most   extraordinarj    idiom,   is    called   at   first,   *  miracles 

*  wrought  in  a  religion,'  we  are  next  to  regard,  as  '  miracles 
*|  attributed  to  a  particular  system,'  and  lastly,  as  '  miracles 

*  the  direct  scope  of  which  is  to  establish  that  system.'  Every 
l?ody,  I  will  venture  to  say,  in  beginning  to  read  the  sentence, 
if  he  forms  any  notion  of  what  the  author  means  by  a  '  miracle 

*  wrought  in  a  religion,'  understands  it  barely  as  a  '  miracle 

*  wrought  among  those  who  profess  a  particular  religion,'  the 
words  appearing  to  be  used  in  the  same  latitude,  as  when  w« 
call  tke  traditional  tales  current  among  the  Jews,  though  they 
should  have  no  relation  to  religion,  Jewish  tales  ;  and  those  in 
like  manner  Mahometan  or  Pagan  tales,  which  are  current 
among  Mahometans  of  Pagans.  Such  a  miracle,  the  reader, 
ere  he  is  aware,  is  brought  to  consider  as  a  miracle  attri^- 
buted  to  a  particular  system  :   nay  further,  as   a   *  miracle, 

*  the  direct  scope  of  which  is  to  establish  that  system.'  Yet 
nothing  can  be  conceived  more  diiferent  than  the  meaning 
of  these  expressions,  which  are  here  jumbled  together  as 
equivalent. 

It  is  plain,  that  all  the  miracles  of  which  there  is  any  record^ 
come  under  the  first  denomination.  They  are  all  supposed 
to  have  been  wrought  before  men,  or  among  men;  and  where- 
ever  there  are  men,  there  is  religion  of  some  kind  or  other. 
Perhaps  too  all  may,  in  a  very  improper  sense,  be  attributed 
to  a  religious  system.  They  all  imply  an  interruption  of  the 
ordinary  course  of  nature.  Such  an  interruption  wherever  it 
is  observed,  will  be  ascribed  to  the  agency  of  those  divinities 
that  are  adored  by  the  observers,  and  so  may  be  said  to  be 
attributed  by  them  to  their  own  system.  But  where  are  the 
miracles  (those  of  holy  writ  excepted)  of  which  you  can  say 
with  propriety,  it  is  their  direct  scope  to  establish  a  particular 
system?  Must  we  not  then  be  strangely  blinded  by  the  charms 
of  a  few  ambiguous  terms,  if  we  are  made  to  confound  things 
so  widely  different  ?  Yet  this  confusion  is  the  very  basis,  on 
which  the  author  founds  his  reasoning,  and  rears  this  tremen- 
dous doctrine  ;   That  '  a  miracle  of  Mahomet,  or  any  of  his 

*  successours,'  and,  by  parity  of  reason,  a  miracle  of  Christ,  or 
any  of  his  apostles,  *  is  refuted  (as  if  it  had  been  mentioned, 

*  and  had  in  express  terms,  been  contradicted)  by  the  testi- 

*  mony  of  Titus  Livius,  Plutarch,   Tacitus,  and  of  all  the 
*^  jiuthors,  Chinese,  Grecian,  and  Roman  Catholick,  who  have 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  H. 

*  related  any  miracles  in  their  particular  religions.'  Here  all 
the  miracles,  that  have  been  related  by  men  of  different  reli- 
gions, are  blended,  as  coming  under  the  common  denomina- 
tion of  miracles,  the  direct  scope  of  which  was  to  establish 
those  particular  religious  systems  ;  an  insinuation,  in  which 
there  is  not  even  the  shadow  of  truth. 

That  the  reader  may  be  satisfied  on  this  point,  I  must  beg 
his  attention  to  the  following  observations  concerning  the 
miracles  of  profane  history.  Firsts  Many  facts  are  related 
as  miraculous,  where  we  may  admit  the  fact,  without  acknow- 
ledging the  miracle.  Instances  of  this  kind  we  have  in  rela- 
tions concerning  comets,  eclipses,  meteors,  earthquakes,  and 
suchlike.  Secondly^  The  miracles  may  be  admitted  as  genuine, 
and  the  manner  in  which  historians  account  for  them,  rejected 
as  absurd.  The  one  is  a  matter  of  testimony,  the  other  of 
conjecture.  In  this  a  man  is  influenced  by  education,  by- 
prejudices,  by  received  opinions.  In  every  country,  as  was 
observed  already,  men  will  recur  to  the  theology  of  the  place, 
for  the  solution  of  every  phenomenon  supposed  miraculous. 
But,  that  it  was  the  scope  of  the  miracle  to  support  the 
theology,  is  one  thing ;  and  that  fanciful  men  thought  they 
discovered  in  the  theology  the  causes  of  the  miracle,  is 
another.  The  inhabitants  of  Lystra  accounted,  from  the 
principles  of  their  own  religion,  for  the  miracle  performed  in 
their  city  by  Paul  and  Barnabas*.  Was  it  therefore  the  scope 
of  that  miracle  to  support  the  Lycaonian  religion  ?  Thirdly^ 
Many  miracles  are  recorded,  as  produced  directly  by  Heaven 
without  the  ministration  of  men  :  by  what  construction  are 
these  discovered  to  be  proofs  of  a  particular  system  ?  Yet 
these  also,  wherever  they  happen,  will  be  accounted  for  by  the 
natives  of  the  country,  from  the  principles  of  their  own  su- 
perstition. Had  any  of  the  Pagan  citizens  escaped  the  ruin 
in  which  Sodom  was  miraculously  involved,  they  would  doubt- 
less have  sought  for  the  cause  of  this  destruction  in  the  estab- 
lished mode  of  polytheism,  and  would  probably  have  imputed 
it  to  the  vengeance  of  some  of  their  deities,  incurred  by  the 
neglect  of  some  frivolous  ceremony.  Would  it  therefore 
have  been  the  scope  of  the  miracle  to  confirm  this  nonsense  ? 
Fourthly^  Even  miracles  said  to  have  been  performed  by  a 
man,  are  no  evidences  of  the  truth  of  that  man's  opinions  j 
such,  I  mean,  as  he  pretends  not  to  have  received  by  revela- 
tion, but  by  the  exercise  of  reason,  by  education,  or  by  infor- 
mation from  other  men  ;  no  more  than  a  man's  being  endowed 
with  bodily  strength  greater  than  ordinary,   would  prove  him 

*  Acts  xiv.  8.  &c. 


Sict.  3*        GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  463 

to  be  superior  to  others  in  his  mental  faculties.  I  conclude 
with  declaring,  that  if  instances  shall  be  produced,  of  miracles 
wrought  by  men  of  probity,  in  proof  of  doctrines  which  they 
affirm  to  have  been  revealed  to  them  from  Heaven,  and  which 
are  repugnant  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Bible,  then  1  shall  think 
it  equitable  to  admit,  that  religious  miracles  contradict  one 
another.  Then  will  reasonable  people  be  reduced  to  the 
dilemma,  either  of  disproving  the  allegations  on  one  side,  or 
of  acknowledging  that  miracles  can  be  no  evidence  of  revela- 
tion. No  attempt  however  hath  as  yet  been  made  by  any 
writer  to  produce  an  instance  of  this  kind. 

*  But  will  nothing  less  satisfy  ?'  replies  the  author.  *  Will 
'■  not  the  predictions  of  augurs  and  oracles,  and  the  intimations 
Vsaid  to  have  been  given  by  the  gods  or  saints  in  dreams  and 
.^visions,  of  things  not  otherwise  knowable  by  those  to  whom 

*  they  were  thus  intimated  ;  will  not  these,  and  suchlike  prodi- 

*  gies,  serve  in  some  degree  as  evidence  ?'  As  evidence  of 
what  ?  Shall  we  say  of  any  religious  principles  conveyed  at  the 
same  time  by  revelation  ?  No,  it  is  not  even  pretended,  that 
there  were  any  such  principles  so  conveyed :  but  as  evidence 
of  principles  which  had  been  long  before  entertained,  and 
which  were  originally  imbibed  from  education,  and  from 
education  only.  That  the  evidence  h^re,  supposing  the  truth 
of  the  facts,  is  at  best  but  very  indirect,  and  by  no  means 
on  the  same  footing  with  that  of  the  miracles  recorded  in  the 
gospel,  might  be  easily  evinced,  if  there  were  occasion.  But 
there  is  in  reality  no  occasion,  since  there  is  no  such  evidence 
of  the  facts  as  can  justly  entitle  them  to  our  notice.  Let  it 
be  remembered,  that,  in  the  fourth  section  of  the  first  part,  it 
was  shown,  that  there  is  the  greatest  disparity,  in  respect,  of 
evidence,  betwixt  miracles  performed  in  proof  of  a  religion 
to  be  established,  and  in  contradiction  to  opinions  generally 
received;  and  miracles  performed,  on  the  contrary,  in  support 
of  a  religion  already  established,  and  in  conjirmation  of  opinions 
generally  received  ;  that,  in  the  former  case  there  is  the 
strongest  presumption  for  the  miracles,  in  the  latter  against 
them.  Let  it  also  be  remembered,  that  in  the  preceding 
section  it  was  shown,  that  the  religion  of  the  Bible  is  the  only 
religion  extant  which  claims  to  have  been  ushered  into  the 
world  by  miracles  ;  that  this  prerogative  neither  the  Pagan 
religion,  the  Mahometan,  nor  the  Roman  Catholick,  can, 
with  any  appearance  of  reason,  arrogate  j  and  that,  by  conse- 
quence, there  is  one  of  the  strongest  presumptions  possihleyor 
the  miracles  of  the  gospel,  which  is  not  onl}'  wanting  in  the 
miracles  of  other  religions,  but  which  is  contrasted  by  the 
strongest  presumption  possible  against  these  miracles.     And 


464  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  fart  II» 

though  this  presumption  should  not,  in  all  cases,  be  accounted 
absolutely  insuperable,  we  must  at  least  say,  it  gives  an  im* 
mense  superiority  to  the  proofs  of  Christianity.  It  were  aa 
endless  and  a  fruitless  task  to  canvass  particularly  the  evi- 
dence of  all  the  pretended  miracles  either  of  Paganism  or 
Popery,  (for  on  this  head  Mahometism  is  much  more  modest) 
but  as  the  author  hath  selected  some,  which  he  considers  as 
the  best  attested,  of  both  religions,  these  shall  be  examined 
severally  in  the  two  subsequent  sections.  From  this  exami* 
nation  a  tolerable  judgment  may  be  formed  concerning  the 
pretensions  of  these  two  species  of  superstition. 

But  from  what  hath  been  said,  it  is  evident,  that  the  con- 
trariety which  the  author  pretends  to  have  discovered  in  th6 
miracles  said  to  have  been  wrought,  as  he  expresseth  it,  in 
different  religions,  vanishes  entirely  on  a  close  inspection. 
He  is  even  sensible  of  this  himself;  and,  as  is  customary  with 
orators,  the  more  inconclusive  his  reasons  are,  so  much  the 
more  positive  are  his  assertions.  "  This  argument,"  says  he, 
**  may  appear  over  subtile  and  refined ;"  indeed  so  subtile  and 
refined,  that  it  is  invisible  altogether ;  *'  but  is  not  in  reo» 

"  lity  different  from  the  reasoning  of  a  judge,  who  supposes 
"  that  the  credit  of  two  witnesses  maintaining  a  crime  against 
"  any  one,  is  destroyed  by  the  testimony  of  two  others,  who 
♦*  affirm  him  to  have  been  two  hundred  leagues  distant,  at  the 
**  same  instant  when  the  crime  is  said  to  have  been  commit* 
**  ted."  After  the  particle  huty  with  which  this  clause  begins, 
the  reader  naturally  expects  such  an  explication  of  the  argu« 
ment,  as  will  convince  him,  that  though  subtile  and  refined^  it 
hath  solidity  and  strength.  Instead  of  this,  he  hath  only  the 
author's  word  warranting  it  to  be  good  to  all  intents  :  "  But«9 
not  in  reality  different,"  ^c.  The  analogy  between  his  exarrv' 
ple  and  his  argument  seems  to  be  but  very  distant ;  I  shall 
therefore,  without  any  comment,  leave  it  with  the  reader  as  I 
find  it. 

Thus  it  appears,  that,  for  aught  the  author  hath  as  yet  prov- 
ed, no  miracles  recorded  by  historians  of  other  religions  are 
subversive  of  the  evidence  arising  from  the  miracles  wrought 
in  proof  of  Christianity,  or  can  justly  be  considered  as  caiv- 
trary  testimony. 


Sect.^.        GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  4BX' 

SECTION  IV. 

Examination  of  the  Pagan  miracles  mentioned  by  Mr.  Hume^ 

OHOULD  one  read  attentively  the  Easay  on  Miracles^  ^lXx^ 
consici.  r  it  solely  as  a  philosophical  disquisition  on  an  ai'stract 
question,  like  most  of  the  other  pieces  in  the  same  collection; 
hfe  could  not  fail  to  wonder,  what  had  induced  the  author  so 
suddenly  to  change  sides  in  the  debate,  and,  by  doing  so,  to 
contradict  himself  in  terms  the  inost  express.  Does  he  not, 
in  the  latter  part  of  that  performan::e,  as  warmly  contend  for 
the  reality  of  some  miracles,  as  he  had  pleaded  in  the  former 
part,  for  the  impossibility  of  all  I  It  is  true,  he  generally  con- 
cludes conceruiug  chose,  that  they  are  '  gross  and  palpable 
falsehoods.'  But  this  serves  only  to  render  his  conduct  the 
more  mysterious,  as  that  conclusion  is  always  preceded  by  an. 
attempt  to  evince,  that  v/e  h  ive  the  greatest  reason  to  receive 
them  as  '  certain  and  infallible  truths.*  Nay,  so  entirely  doth 
his  zca/ make  him  forget  even  his  most  positive  assertions, 
(and  what  inconsistencies  may  not  be  dreaded  from  an  excess 
of  zeal  I)  that  he  shows  minutely  we  have  those  very  evidences 
for  the  miracles  he  is  pleased  to  patronize,  which,  he  had 
strenuously  argued,  were  not  to  be  found  in  support  of  any 
miracles  whatever. 

"  There  is  not  to  be  found,"  he  affirms*,  "  in  all  history,  a 
**  miracle  attested  by  a  sufficient  number  of  men,  of  such  un- 
*'  questioned  good  sense,  education,  and  learning,  as  to  secure 
"  us  against  ail  delusion  in  themselves  ;  of  such  undoubted 
*'  integrity,  as  to  place  them  beyond  all  suspicion  of  any  design 
'  **  to  deceive  others  ;  of  such  credit  and  reputation  in  the  eyes 
;^  of  mankind,  as  to  have  a  great  deal  to  lose,  in  case  of  be- 
**  ing  detected  in  any  falsehood  ;  and  at  the  same  time  attest- 
**  ing  facts  performed  in  such  a  publick  manner,  and  in  so  ce- 
*'  lebrated  a  part  of  the  world,  as  to  render  the  detection  un- 
*'  avoidable."  We  need  only  turn  over  a  few  pages  of  the  Es' 
say^  and  we  shall  find  the  author  taking  great  pains  to  con- 
vince us,  that  all  these  circumstances  concurred  in  support  of 
certain  miracles,  which,  notwithstanding  his  ^e/zera/r^w/wf/owy 
he  has  thought  fit  to  honour  with  a  very  particular  attention. 

He  has  not  indeed  told  us  how  many  witnesses,  in  his  way 
of  reckoning,  will  constitute  '■  a  sufficient  number  ;'  but  for 
some  miracles  which  he  relates,  he  ^ves  us  clouds  of  witnesses, 
one    cloud    succeeding   another :     for  the    jyiolinists,    who 

•  p.  183. 

N  nn 


466  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  II. 

tried  to  discredit  them,  "  soon  found  themselves  overwhelm- 
"  ed  by  a  cloud  of  new  witnesses,  one  hundred  and  twenty  in 
*'  number*."  As  to  the  character  of  the  witnesses,  "  most 
"  of  them  were  persons  of  credit  and  substance  in  Parisf ;" 
"  again,  those  miracles  "  were  attested  by  witnesses  of  credit 
*'  and  distinction,  before  judges  of  unquestioned  integi-ity  J;" 
"  and,  they  were  proved  by  witnesses,  before  the  ofticialt)  or 
"  bishop's  court  of  Paris,  under  the  eyes  of  Cardinal  Noail- 
**  les,  whose  character  for  integrity  and  capacity  was  never 
*'  contested  even  by  his  enemies  ;  ;"  again,  *"■  the  secular  cler- 
*'  gy  of  France,  particularly  the  rectors  or  cures  of  Paris,  give 
**  testimony  to  these  impostures,  than  whom  no  clergy  are 
"  more  celebrated  for  strictness  of  life  and  manners  ^."  Once 
more,  one  principal  witness,  *'  Monsieur  de  Montgeron,  was 
"  counsellor  or  judge  of  the  parliament  of  Paris,  a  man  of 
"  figure  and  character**;"  another  "  no  less  a  man  than  the  Due 
*'  de  Chatillon,  a  Duke  and  Peer  of  France,  of  the  highest 
"  rank  and  familyfj-."  It  is  strange,  if  credit^  and  substance, 
and  distinction^  and  capacity,  are  not  sufficient  securities  to  us, 
that  the  witnesses  were  not  •■  themselves  deluded  ;'  it  is  strange, 
if  uncontested  integrity^  ^nd.  eminent  strictness  of  life  and  man- 
ners, cannot  remove  '■  all  suspicion  of  any  design  in  them  to 
deceive  others  j'  it  is  strange,  if  one  who  was  counsellor  of  the 
parliament  of  Paris,  a  man  of  figure  and  character,  and 
if  another  was  a  Duke  and  Peer  of  France,  of  the  highest 
rank  and  family,  had  not  '  a  great  deal  to  lose,  '-  in 
case  of  being  detected  in  any  falsehood :'  nay,  and  if  all 
those  witnesses  of  credit  and  distinction^  had  not  also  a  great 
deal  to  lose  ;  "  since  the  Jesuits,  a  learned  body,  supported 
"  by  the  civil  magistrate,  were  determined  enemies  to  those 
*'  opinions,  in  whose  favour  the  miracles  were  said  to  have 
"  been  wroughtJJ ;"  and  since  *'  Monsieur  Herault,  thelieuten- 
"  ant  de  police^  of  whose  great  reputation,  all  who  have  been 
"  in  France  about  that  time,  have  heard ;  and  whose  vigi- 
"  lance,  penetration,  activity,  and  extensive  intelligence,  have 
*'  been  much  talked  of;  since  this  magistrate,  who  by  the  na- 
**  ture  of  his  office  is  almost  absolute,  was  invested  with  full 
*'  powers  on  purpose  of  suppress  these  miracles,  and  fre- 
*'  quently  seized  and  examined  the  witnesses  and  subjects  of 
*'  them  ;  though  he  could  never  reach  any  thing  satisfactory 
**  against  them||i|."  As  to  the  only  remaining  circumstance, 
*  their  being  performed  in  a  publick  manner,  and  in  a  celebrat- 

•  p.  197.  in  the  note.  '^  f  ib.  \  p.  197. 

H  p.  196.  in  the  note.  §  p.  199.  in  the  note. 

••  p.  295.  in  the  note.  tt  P-  1^9.  in  the  note. 

\\  p.  195.  jjl)  p.  197.  in  the  note. 


Sect.  4.        GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  467 

*  ed  part  of  the  world,'  this  concurred  also-  They  were  per- 
formed, we  are  told,  "  in  a  learned  age,  and  on  the  most  emi- 
"  nent  theatre  that  is  now  in  the  world*  ;"  besides  "  twenty- 
"  two  rectors  or  curea  of  Paris,  with  infinite  earnestness 
"  pressed  the  Archbishop,  an  enemy  to  the  Jansenists,  to  ex- 
*'  amine  those  miracles,  which  they  assert  to  be  known  to  the 
"  whole  world,  and  indisputably  certain  f ." 

Thus  the  essayist  hath  laid  us  under  the  disagreeable  neces- 
sity of  inferring,  that  he  is  either  very  rash  in  his  general  as- 
sertions, or  useth  very  great  amplification  in  his  particular 
narrations.  Perhaps  in  both  inferences,  we  shall  find,  upon 
inquir) ,  that  there  is  some  truth.  In  his  History  of  Great 
Britain^  he  gives  us  notice^:,  that  he  addressed  himself  "  to  a 
"  more  distant  posterity,  than  will  ever  be  reached  by  any  lo- 
"  cal  temporary  theology."  Why  did  he  not  likewise,  in 
writing  the  Essays^  entertain  this  grand  idea?  It  would  have 
been  of  use  to  him.  It  would  have  prevented  his  falling 
into  those  inconsistencies,  which  his  too  great  attention  and 
antipathy  to  what  he  calls  a  local  temporary  theology^  only 
could  occasion ;  and  which,  when  that  theology,  according 
to  his  hypothesis,  shall  be  extinct,  and  when  all  our  religious 
controversies  shall  be  forgotten,  must  appear  unaccountable 
and  ridiculous.  People  will  not  then  have  the  means  of  dis- 
coveringj  what  is  so  obvious  to  us  his  contemporaries,  that 
he  only  assumes  the  appearance  of  an  advocate  for  some 
miracles,  which  are  disbelieved  by  the  generality  of  Protes- 
tants, his  countrymen,  in  order,  by  the  comparison,  to  vilify 
the  miracles  of  sacred  writ,  which  are  acknowledged  by  them^ 

But  to  descend  to  particulars,  I  shall  begin  with  consider- 
ing those  miracles,  for  which  the  author  is  indebted  to  the  an- 
cient Pagans.  First,  in  order  to  convince  us,  how  easy  a  mat- 
ter it  is  for  cunning  and  impudence  to  impose  by  false  mira- 
cles on  the  credulity  of  barbarians,  he  introduces  the  story  of 
Alexander  of  Pontus|l.  The  justness  of  the  account  he  gives 
of  this  impostor  from  Lucian,  I  shall  not  dispute.  But  that 
it  may  appear,  how  little  the  Christian  religion  is  affected  by 
this  relation,  notwithstanding  some  insinuations  he  hath  inter- 
mixt  with  it,  I  shall  make  rlie  following  remarks. 

It  is  of  importance  to  know,  what  was  the  profession  of  this 
once  so  famous,  though  now  forgotten  Paphlagonian.  Was 
he  a  publisher  of  strange  gods  ?  No§.     Was  he  the  founder  of 

•  p.  175.  f  p.  196,  in  the  note. 

\  James  I.  chap.  2.  ||  p.  188.  &c. 

\  The  learned  and  judicious  author  of  the  Observations  on  the  conTerslcn  and 
apostleship  of  Saint  Paul,  hath  inadvertertly  said  of  Alexander,  that  he  introduced 
ii  nevi  god,  into  Pontus.     The  truth  is,  he  only  exhibited  a  reproduction  of  Escula- 


1168  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  11. 

a  new  system  in  religion  ?   No.     What  was.  he  then  ?  He  was 
no  otht  r  than  a  professed  fortune-teller.     What  were  the  arts 
by  which  he  carried  on  this  gainful  trade  ?   The  essayist  justly 
remarks,  that  '^  it  was  a  wise  policy  in  him  to  lay  the  first  scene 
'  of  his  impostures  in  a  country,   where  vhe  people  were  ex- 
'  tremely  ignorant  and  stupid,  and  ready  to  swallow  the  gross- 
*  est  delusion.'     For  ''  had  Alexander  fixed  his  residtnce  at 
*'  Athens,  the  philosophers  of  that  renowned  mart  of  learning, 
*'  had  immediately  spread  through  the  whole  Roman  empire 
"  their  sense  of  the   matter  ;   which,   being  supported  b ,  so 
"  great  authority,  and  displayed  by  all  the  iorce  of  reason  and 
"  eloquence,  had  entirely  opened   the  eyes  of   mankind."     I 
shall  beg  leave  to  remark  another  instance  of  good  polic^•  in 
him.     He  attempted  noi  to  gain  the  veneration  of  the  multi- 
tude by  opposing,  but  by  adopting  their  religious  prejudices. 
His  whole  plan  of  deceit  was  founded  in  the  established  si-per- 
stition.     The  author  himself  v;ill  acknowledge,  it  would  have 
been  extreme  folly  in  him   to  have   acted   otherwise  :  and   all 
the  world,  I  believe,  will  agree  in  thinking,  that,  in  that  case, 
he   could  not   have   had   the   smallest  probability  of   success. 
"What  were  the  miracles  he  wrought?    I  know  of  none,  unless 
/we  will  dignif)'  with  that  name,  some  feats  of  legerdemain, 
performed   mostly  by  candle  light ;  which,   in   many  parrs  of 
Europe,  we  may  daily  see  equalled,  nay  far  exceeded,  b)  those 
of  modem  jugglers.     Add  to  these  some  oracles  he  pronounc- 
ed, concerning  which,  if  we  may  form  a  judgment  from   the 
account  and  specimen  given  us  by  Lucian,  we  should  conclude, 
that,  like  other  Heathen  oracles,  they  were  generally  iminielli- 
gible,   equivocal,   or   false.      Before    whom  flid  he  exhibit  his 
wonders  ?    Before  none,  if   he  could  heip  it,    that   were  not 
thorough  believers  in  the  popular  svstem.     His  nocturnal  mys- 
teries were  , always   introduced   with  an   avaunt  to   Atheists^ 
Christians,   and  Epicureans :  and  indeed  it  was  dangerous  for 
anj'  such  to  be  present  at  them.     Mr.  Hume  says,  that,  *'  from 
*'  his   ignorant  .Paphlagor,i,.ns,  he  v^as  enabled  to  proceed  to 
*'  the  enlisting  of  votaries   among  the  Grecian  philosophers." 
On  what  authority  he  advance     this,   I  have  not  been  able  to 
discover.     He  acids,  "•  and  men  oj  the  most  eminent  rank  and 
*'  distinction  in  Rome."     Lucian  mentions  one  man  of  rank, 
Rutilianus,  among  the  votaries  of  the  prophet ;  an  honest  man 

pius,  a  well  Icnown  deity  in  those  parts,  tr,  whom  he  gave  indeed  the  weiu  na7ne 
Glycon.  In  this  rhere  was  nothirg  unsuiable  to  the  ger.ius  of  the  mjthclogy. 
Accordir.gly,  we  do  not  find,  that  either  the  priests,  ^r  tbe  people,  werein  thelea»t 
alarmed  for  the  religion  of  che  country,  cr  charged  Alexander  as  an  innovator  in 
rehgious  matters.  On  the  contrary,  the  greatest  enemies  he  had  to  encounter,.. 
"Were  not  the  religionists,  but  the  latitudinarians. 


Sect.  4.  GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  469^ 

he  calls  him,  but  at  the  same  time  the  weakest,  the  most  su- 
perstitious that  ever  lived.  As  to  the  military  expedition, 
which  one  would  imagine  from  Pvir.  Hume's  expression,  the 
Emperour  had  resolved  on,  in  consequence  of  the  encourage^ 
ment  which  the  delusive  prophecies  of  this  impostor  gave 
him,  we  find,  on  the  contrary,  it  v/as  undertaken,  before  those 
prophecies  were  uttered.  But  further.  Did  Alexander  risk 
any  thing  in  assuming  the  character  of  the  interpreter  of  Es- 
CULAPius  ?  Did  he  lose,  or  did  ht-  suffer  any  thing  in  defence 
of  it?  Quite  the  reverse.  He  enriched  himself  by  this  most 
ingenious  occupation.  I  shall  say  nothing  of  the  picture 
which  Lucian  gives  of  his  morals,  of  the  many  artifices  v.  hich 
he  used,  or  of  the  atrocious  crimes  which  he  perp-'trated. 
It  must  be  owned,  that  the  principal  scope  for  calumny  and  de- 
traction is  what  concerns  the  private  life  and  moral  character. 
Lucian  was  an  enemy,  and,  by  his  own  account,  had  received 
the  highest  provocation.  But  1  avoid  every  thing,  on  this 
topick,  that  can  admit  a  question. 

Where,  I  would  gladly  know,  lies  the  resemblance  between 
this  impostor  and  the  first  uublishers  of  the  gospel  ?  Every 
one,  on  the  most  superficial  review,  may  discover,  that,  in  all 
the  material  circumstances,  they  are  perfect  contrasts.  There 
appears  not  therefore  to  be  great  danger  in  the  poignant  re- 
mark with  which  the  author  concludes  this  relation  :  "  Though 
*'  much  to  be  wished^  it  does  not  always  happen,  that  evtr\  Al- 
*'  exander  meets  with  a  Lucian  ready  to  expose  and  detect  his 
*'  impostures."  Lest  the  full  import  of  this  emphatiral  clause 
should  not  be  apprehended,  the  author hcth  been  btill  more  ex- 
plicit in  the  note:  "•  It  may  here  perhaps  be  objected,  that  I 
*'  proceed  rashly,  and  form  my  notions  of  Alexander,  merely 
*'  from  the  account  given  of  him  by  Lucian,  a  professed  enemy. 
**  It  -were  indeed  to  be  wished^  that  some  of  the  accounts  pub- 
*'  lished  bv  his  followers  and  accomplices  had  remained.  The 
*'  opposition  and  contrast  betwixt  the  character  and  conduct 
**  of  the  same  man,  as  drawn  by  a  fi'iend  or  an  enemy,  is  as 
*'  strong,  even  in  common  life,  much  more  in  these  religious 
"  matters,  as  that  betwixt  anv  two  men  in  the  world,  betwixt 
*'  Alexander  and  St.  Paul  for  instance  "  Who  can  forbear  to 
lament  the  uncommon  distress  of  an  author,  obliged  every 
moment  to  recur  to  unavailing  wishes  ?  Mr.  Hume,  however, 
in  this  calamitous  situation,  solaceth  himself,  as  well  as  he 
can,  by  supposing  what  he  cannot  assert.  He  snpposeth  what 
would  have  been  the  case,  if  his  wishes  could  have  been  grati- 
fied J  and  artfully  insinuates,  in  this  manner  to  his  readers  ; 
that  if  we  had  the  character  and  conduct  of  the  aposde,  deli- 
neated by  as  able  an  enemy  as  Lucian,  we  should  find  the  por-^ 
trait  as  ugly  as  that  of  Alexander, 


470  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  11. 

Let  us  then  for  once  suppose,  what  the  author  so  ardently 
wishes,  that  such  an  enemy  had  undertaken  the  history  of 
Paul  of  I'arsus.  I  can  easily  conceive  what  a  different  repre- 
sentation we  should,  in  that  case,  have  had,  of  the  mental  en- 
dowments and  moral  disposition,  as  well  as  of  the  inducements 
and  views  of  this  Christian  missionary.  I  can  conceive  also, 
that  both  his  actions  and  discourses  might  have  been  strangely 
disfigured.  But  if  the  biographer  had  maintained  any  regard, 
I  say  not,  to  truth,  but  to  probability  ;  there  are  some  things, 
we  may  be  absolutely  certain  he  would  never  have  advanced. 
He  would  not  surely  have  said  of  Paul,  that  he  was  by  profes- 
sion a  cunning  man,  or  conjurer  ;  one  who,  for  a  little  money, 
either  told  people  their  fortunes,  or  taught  them  how  to  reco- 
ver stolen  goods.  He  would  not,  I  suppose,  have  pretended, 
that  wherever  the  apostle  went,  he  flattered  the  superstition  of 
the  populace,  in  order  to  gain  them,  and  founded  all  his  pre- 
tensions on  the  popular  system.  He  would  not  have  alledged, 
that  Paul  enrklied  himself,  or  that  he  could  ever  have  the 
prospect  of  enriching  himself,  by  his  vocation  ;  nay,  or  that  he 
risked  nothing,  or  suffered  nothing,  by  it.  He  could  not  have 
said  concerning  him,  that  he  declined  the  audience  or  scrutiny 
of  men,  whose  opinions  in  religion  differed  from  those  on 
which  his  mission  was  founded.  He  durst  not  have  imputed 
to  him  the  xuise  policy  of  laying  the  scene  of  bis  impostures, 
only  where  ignorance,  barbarism,  and  stupidity  prejVailed  :  as 
it  is  unquestionable,  that  our  apostle  traversed  great  part,  not 
only  of  Asia  Minor,  but  of  Macedonia,  and  Achaia  ;  fixed  his 
residence  eighteen  months  at  Corinth,  a  city  not  less  celebrated 
for  the  polite  arts,  than  for  its  populousness  and  riches  ; 
preached  publickly  at  Athens  before  the  Stoicks  and  the  Epi- 
cureans, and  even  before  the  Areopagus,  the  most  venerable 
judicature  in  Greece  ;  not  afraid  of  what  the  philosophers  of 
that  renowned  mart  of  learning,  might  spread  through  the 
whole  Roman  empire,  concerning  him  and  his  doctrine  ;  nay, 
and  lastly  preached  at  Rome  itself,  the  mistress  and  metropo- 
lis of  the  world. 

The  reader  will  observe,  that,  in  this  comparison,  I  have 
shunned  every  thing  that  is  of  a  private,  and  therefore  of  a 
dubious  nature.  The  whole  is  founded  on  such  actions  and 
events  as  were  notorious ;  Avhich  it  is  not  in  the  power  of  con- 
temporary historians  to  falsify;  such  with  regard  to  Alexan- 
der, as  a  votary  could  not  have  dissembled  ;  such  with  regard 
to  Paul,  as  an  enemy  durst  not  have  denied.  We  are  truly  in- 
debted to  the  essayist,  who  intending  to  exhibit  a  rival  to  the 
apostle,  hath  produced  a  character  which,  we  find  on  making 
the  comparison,  serves  only  for  a  foil.     Truth  never  shines 


Sect.  4.  GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  471 

with  greater  lustre,  than  when  confronted  with  falsehood. 
The  evidence  of  our  religion,  how  strong  soever,  appears  not 
so  irresistibly,  considered  by  itself,  as  when  by  comparison  we 
perceive,  that  none  of  those  artifices  and  circumstances  attend- 
ed its  propagation,  which  the  whole  course  of  experience  shows 
to  be  necessary  to  render  imposture  successful. 

The  next  topick  on  which  the  ingenious  author  hath  be- 
stowed some  flourishes,  is  the  miracle  '■'  which  Tacitus  reports 
"  of  Vespasian,  who  cured  a  blind  man  in  Alexandria,  by 
"  means  of  his  spittle,  and  a  lame  man  by  the  mere  touch  of 
"  his  foot,  in  obedience  to  a  vision  of  the  god  Serapis,  who 
"  had  enjoined  them  to  have  recourse  to  the  emperour,  for 
"  these  miraculous  and  extraordinary  cures*."  The  story  he 
introduces  with  informing  us,  that  it  is  *■'  one  of  the  best  attested 
'^  miracles  in  all  profane  history."  If  so,  it  will  the  better  serve 
for  a  sample  of  w^hat  may  be  expected  from  that  quarter. 
*'  Every  circumstance,"  he  tell  us, ''  seems  to  add  weight  to  the 
*-V  testimony,  and  might  be  displayed  at  large,  with  all  the  force 
*^  of  argument  and  eloquence,  if  any  one  were  now  concerned 
"  to  enforce  the  evidence  of  that  exploded  and  idolatrous  su- 
**  perstition."  For  my  part,  were  I  concerned  to  enforce  the 
evidence  of  that  exploded  and  idolatrous  superstition,  I  should 
aot  wish  the  story  were  in  better  hands  than  in  the  author's. 
He  is  by  no  means  deficient  in  eloquence  ;  and  if  sometimes 
there  appear  a  deficiency  in  argument,  that  is  not  imputable 
to  him,  but  to  the  subject,  which  cannot  furnish  him  with  any 
better  :  and  though  I  do  not  suspect  him  to  be  in  the  least  con- 
cerned to  re-establish  Paganism,  yet  it  is  well  known,  that 
hatred  to  his  adversary  may  as  strongly  animate  an  advocate 
to  exert  himself,  as  affection  to  his  client. 

But  to  proceed  to  the  story :  First,  the  author  pleads  the 
*'  gravity,  solidity,  age,  and  probity  of  so  great  an  emperour, 
"  who,  through  the  whole  course  of  his  life,  conversed  in  a 
"  familiar  wav  with  his  friends  and  courtiers,  and  never  aiTect- 
"  ed  those  extraordinary  airs  of  divinity  assumed  by  Alexander 
"  and  Demetrius."  To  this  character,  the  justness  of  which 
I  intend  not  to  controvert,  I  shall  beg  leave  to  add,  what  is 
equally  indubitable,  and  much  to  the  purpose,  that  no  empe- 
rour showed  a  stronger  inclination  to  corroborate  his  title  by 
a  sanction  of  the  gods,  than  the  prince  of  whom  he  is  speak- 
ing. This,  doubtless,  he  thought  the  more  necessary  in  his 
case,  as  he  was  of  an  obscure  family,  and  nowise  related  to 
any  of  his  predecessors.     How  fond  he  was  of  pleading  visi- 

*  p.  292.  &c. 


47^  A;*rHE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  II. 

o«5,  and  presages^  and  auguries,  in  his  favour,  all  the  world 
Jcnows*.  .  * 

The  author  adds,  *'  The  historian,  a  contemporary  writeuf 
''noted  for  candour  and  veracity,  and  withal  the  greatest  and 
';'-  most  penetrating  genius  perhaps  of  all  antiquity,  and  so  free 
^*^  from  any  tendency  to  superstition  and  credulity,  that  he  evert 
J:Mies  under  the  contrary  imputation  of  atheism  and  profane- 
'f  ness."  This  would  say  a  great  deal,  if  the  character  of  the 
historian  were  of  any  mDraent  in  the  question.  Doth  Tacitus 
pretend  that  he  was  himself  a  witness  of  the  miracle  ?  No. 
Doth  he  mention  it  as  a  thing  which  he  believes  i  No.  In 
either  case  i  acknowledge,  that  the  reputation  of  the  relater 
for  candour  and  penetration,  must  have  added  weight  to  the 
relation,  whether  considered  as  his  testimony,  or  barely  as  his 
opinion.  J3ut  is  it  fair  to  plead  the  veracity  of  the  writer  ia 
proot  of  every  popular  rumour  mentioned  by  him  ?  His  vera* 
city  is  only  concerned  to  satisfy  us,  that  it  was  actimlly  report- 
ed, as  he  relates  ;  or  that  the  attempt  was  made,  and  the  mi- 
racle pretended  i  a  point  which,  I  presume,  nobody  would 
have  disputed,  although  the  authority  had  been  less  than  that 
of  Tacitus.  Indeed  the  historian  doth  not  say  directly,  whe- 
ther he  believes  the  miracle  or  not ;  but  by  his  manner  of  tel- 
ling it,  he  plainly  insinuates,  that  he  thought  it  ridiculous.  In 
introducing  it,  he  intimates  the  utility  of  such  reports  to  the 
Emperour's  cause.  "  By  which,"  says  he,  "  the  favour  of 
*'  heaven,  and  the  appointment  of  the  gods,  might  be  urged 
"  in  support  of  his  title|."  When  he  names  the  god  Serapis^ 
as  warning  the  blind  man  to  recur  to  Vespasian,  he  adds,  ia 
evident  contempt  and  derision  of  his  godship,  ''  Who  is  ador- 
f'  ed  above  all  others  by  the  Egyptians,  a  people  addicted  to 
*'  superstition  J."  Again  he  speaks  of  the  emperour,  as  in- 
duced to  hope  for  success,  by  the  persuasive  tongues  of  flat- 
terersll.  A  serious  believer  of  the  miracle  would  hardly  have 
used  such  a  style  in  relating  it.  But  to  what  purpose  did  he 
then  relate  it?  The  answer  is  easy.  Nothing  could  be  more 
characteristick  of  the  Emperour,  or  could  better  show  the  arts 
he  had  recourse  to,  and  the  hold  which  flattery  had  of  him  ; 
nothing  could  be  more  characteristick  of  the  Alexandrians^i^ 
the  people  amongst  whom  the  miracle  is  said  to  have  been 
wrought.  '^' 

•  Auctoritas,  et  quasi  majestas  quxdam,  ut  scilicet  inopirvato  et  adhuc  novo  prin- 
cipl  decrat,  haecquoque  accessit.  Sueton. 

t  Quels  coelestis  favor,  et  qusedam  in  Vespasianuni  incUnattb  tiuminum  ostende- 
retur. 

\  Quern  dedita  superstitionibus  gens  ante  alios  colit. 

II  Vocibus  adiUanuura  in  spem  iuduci. 


Sect34.  GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  47S 

*  **»^  The  persons,"  says  the  essayist,  *'  from  whose  testimony- 
**  he  related  the  miracle,  of  established  character  for  judg- 
"merit  and  veracity,  as  we  may  well  suppose;  eye-witnesses 
*'  of  the  fact,  and  confirming  their  verdict,  after  the  Flavian 
"  family  were  despoiled  of  the  empire,  and  could  no  longer 
**  give  any  reward  as  the  price  of  a  lie."  Persons  of  establish" 
ed  character  for  judgment  and  veracity  !  Who  told  Mr.  Hume 
so  i  It  was  not  Tacitus.  He  only  denominates  them  in  gene- 
ral* I  "  They  who  were  present,"  and  *'  a  crowd  of  bystani 
f  ders."  The  author,  conscious  that  he  advances  this  with- 
out even  the  shadow  of  authority,  hath  subjoined,  in  order  to 
palliate  the  matter,  as  we  may  well  suppose.  An  admirable  ex- 
pedient for  supplying  a  weak  plea,  with  those  convenient  cir- 
cumstances that  can  give  it  strength  !  When  facts  fail,  which 
is>not  seldonj  the  case,  we  need  but  apply  to  supposition,  whose 
help  is  always  near.  But  if  this  be  allowed  to  lake  the  place 
of  argument,  I  see  no  reason  why  I  may  not  avail  myself  of 
the  privilege  of  supposing,  as  well  as  the  author.  The  wit- 
nesses then,  I  will  suppose,  were  mostly  an  ignorant  rabble  : 
but  I  wrong  my  cause  ;  I  have  a  better  foundation  than  sup- 
|)osal,  having  Tacitus  himself,  and  all  antiquity  on  my  side, 
•when  I  add  deeply  immersed  in  superstition^  particularly  at- 
tached to  the  worship  of  Serapis^  and  keenly  engaged  in  sup- 
port of  Vespasian^  Alexandria  having  been  the  first  city  of 
note  that  publickly  declared  for  him.  Was  it  then  matter  of 
surprise,  that  a  story,  which  at  once  soothed  the  superstition 
of  the  populace,  and  favoured  their  political  schemes,  should 
gain  ground  among  them  ?  Can  we  justly  wonder,  that  the 
wiser  few,  who  were  not  deceived  should  convive  at,  or  even 
contribute  to  promote  a  deceit,  which  was  highly  useful  to  the 
cause  wherein  themselves  were  embarked,  and  at  the  same 
time  highly  grateful  to  the  many  ?  Lastly,  can  we  be  surpris- 
ed that  any,  who,  for  seven  and  twenty  years,  had,  from  mo- 
tives of  interest,  and  ambition,  and  popularity,  propagated  a 
falsehood,  should  not  afterwards  be  willing  to  expose  them- 
Stlves  as  liars  ? 

The  author  finishes  the  story  thus :  "  To  which  if  we  add 
"  the  publick  nature  of  the  facts  related,  it  will  appear,  that 
**  no  evidence  can  well  be  supposed  stronger  for  so  gross  and 
**■  so  palpable  a  falsehood."  As  to  the  nature  of  the  facts,  we 
are  told  by  Tacitus,  that  when  Vespasian  consulted  the  phy- 
sicians, whether  such  maladies  were  curable  by  human  artj 
they  declared-j-,  that  "  in  the  one  the  power  of  sight  was  not 

*  Qui  interfuere.— — Quae  astabat  tnultitudo. 

t  Huic  non  eaesam  vim  lumims,  et  red'turam,  si  pellerentur  obstantia:  illi 
elapsos  in  pravum  artus,  si  salubris  vis  adhibeatur,  posse  integrari. 

900 


4/4  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Pa?t  U. 

"extinct,  but  would  return,  were  the  obstacles  remaved';'fhat 
"  in  the  other,  the  joints  had  suffered  some  dislocation,  which 
"  by  a  salutary  pressure  might  be  redressed."  From  this  ac- 
count we  are  naturally  led  to  conclude,  that  the  disorders  were 
not  so  conspicuous,  but  that  either  they  might  have  been  feign- 
ed, where  they  were  not ;  or  that  cures  might  have  been  pre- 
tended, where  none  were  performed.  I  think  it  is  even  a  fur- 
ther presumption  of  the  truth  of  this  conclusion,  that  Sueto- 
nius, the  only  other  Roman  historian  who  mentions  the  mira- 
cle, (1  know  not  how  he  hath  been  overlooked  by  Mr.  Htime) 
differs  from  Tacitus,  in  the  account  he  gives  of  the  lameness. 
The  one  represents  it  as  being  in  the  hand,  the  other,  as  in 
the  leg*. 

There  are  other  circumstances  regarding  this  story  on  which 
I  might  make  some  remarks  ;  but  shall  forbeart  as  it  is  im-i 
possible  to  enter  into  a  minute  discussion  of  particulars,  that 
appear  but  trivial,  when  considered  severally,  without  grow- 
ing tiresome  to  the  bulk  of  readers.  I  shall  therefore  only 
subjoin  these  simple  questions.  Firsts  What  emperour  or 
other  potentate  was  flattered  in  his  dignity  and  pretensions  by 
the  miracles  of  our  Lord  ?  What  eminent  personage  foun^ 
himself  interested  to  support,  by  his  authority  and  influence, 
the  credit  of  these  miracles  !  Agam^  What  popular  supersti- 
tion or  general  and  rooted  prejudices  were  they  calculated  to  con- 
firm !  These  two  circumstances,  were  there  no  other,  make 
the  greatest  odds  imaginable  betwixt  the  miracles  of  Vespa- 
sian and  those  of  Jesus  Christ. 

So  much  for  the  Pagan  miracles  mentioned  by  the  author. 


SECTION  V. 

Examijiation  of  the  Popish  miracles  mentioned  by  Mr.  Hume. 

X  HE  author  soon  descends  from  ancient  to  modern  times, 
and  leaving  Paganism,  recurs  to  Popery,  a  much  more  fruitful 
source  of  lying  wonders. 

The  first  of  this  kind  he  takes  notice  of-]-,  is  a  Spanish  mi- 
racle recorded  in  the  memoirs  of  Cardinal  de  Retz.  The  sto- 
ry, he  says,  is  very  memorable,  and  may  well  deserve  our 
consideration.     "  When    that   intriguing  politician   fled   into 

■    *  Manum    seger.     Tacitus,     Debili    crure.      Suitonius.     Mr.  Hume,    in 
the  last  edition  of  the  Essay  mejitions  Suetonius>  but  takes  no  ncftice  of  this 
difference  between  his  account  and  that  of  Tacitus, 
t  p.  193.  &c. 


Sect.^.  GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  475- 

"  Spain,  to  avoid  the  persecution  of  his  enemies,  he  passed 
"  through  Saragossa  the  capital  of  Arragon  ;  where  he  was 
"  shown  in  the  cathedral  church,  a  man,  who  had  served 
"  twenty  j^ears  as  a  door-keeper  of  the  church,  and  was  well 
"  known  to  every  body  in  town,  that  had  ever  paid  their  de-' 
"  votions  at  that  cathedral. — He  had  been  for  so  long  a  time 
*' wanting  a  leg ;  but  recovered  that  limb,  by  the  rubbing  of 
"  holv  oil  upon  the  stump  ;  and^  when  the  cardinal  examined- 
*'  /V,  he  found  it  to  be  a  true  natural  leg^  like  the  other.''''  Would 
not  any  person  imagine,  from  the  last  words  of  the  sentence, 
that  the  cardinal  had  ordered  the  man  to  put  oif  his  shoes  and 
stockings,  that,  by  touch  as  well  as  by  sight,  he  might  be  sa.- 
tisfied,  there  was  no  artifice  used,  but  that  both  his  legs  con- 
sisted of  genuine  flesh  and  bone  ?  Yet  the  truth  is,  his  Emi- 
nency  did  not  think  it  worth  while  to  examine  any  one  circum- 
stance of  this  wonderful  narration,  but  contented  himself- 
with  reporting  it  precisely  as  it  had  been  told  him.  His  words 
literally  translated  are,  "  In  that  church  they  showed  me  a 
*'  man,  whose  business  it  was  to  light  the  lamps,  of  which 
"  theV  have  a  prodigious  number,  telling  me,  that  he  had 
*'  been  seen  seven  years  at  the  gate,  with  one  leg  only.  I  saw 
"  him  there  with  two*."  Not  one  word  of  trial  or  examina- 
tion, or  even  so  much  as  a  single  question  asked  on  the  sub- 
ject ;  not  a  syllable  of  his  finding  the  leg  to  be  either  true  or 
false,  natural  or  artificial,  like  the  other  or  unlike.  I  have  a 
better  opinion  both  of  the  candour  and  of  the  good  sense  of 
Mr.  Hume,  than  to  imagine,  he  would  have  designedly  mis- 
represented this  story,  in  order  to  render  it  fitter  for  his  pur- 
pose. I  believe  the  source  of  this  errour  hath  been  solely  the 
trusting  to  his  memory  in  the  relation  which  he  gave,  and  not 
taking  the  trouble  to  consult  the  passage  in  the  memoirs.  This 
conjecture  appears  the  more  probable,  as  he  hath  made  some 
other  alterations,  which  are  nowise  conducive  to  his  design  ; 
such  as,  that  the  man  had  been  seen  in  the  church  twenty  vears 
wanting  a  leg,  and  that  he  was  a  door-keeper ;  whereas  the 
memoir-writer  says  only  seven  years,  and  that  he  was  one  xvho 
lighted  the  lamps-\. 

*  L'on  m'y  montra  iin  homme,  qui  servoit  a  allumer  les  lampes,  qui  y  sont  en 
nombre  prodigieux  ;  et  l'on  me  dit,  qu'on  I'y  avoit  vu  sept  ans  a  la  porte  de  cet- 
te  eglise,    avec  une  seule  jarnbe.     Je  I'y  vis  avec  deux.     Liv.  4.     fun.  1654. 

f  Since  finishing  this  tract,  I  have  seen  an  edition  of  Mr  Hume's  essays,  &.c. 
later  than  that  here  refeired  to.  It  is  printed  at  London  1760  I  must  do  the  au- 
thor the  justice  to  observe,  that,  in  this  editioij,  he  liath  correcied  the  niisr'ike, 
as  to  the  cardinal's  examining  the  man's  leg,  of  which  he  only  says,  "  I'he  cardi- 
"  nal  assures  us,  that  he  saw  him  with  two  legs."  He  still  calls  liim  a  door- keeper y. 
and  says,  that  he  had  served  tvjenty  years  in  this  capacity. 


iT6  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  PartH. 

*'  This  miraele  was  vouched,"  says  the  author,  "  by  all  the 
**  canons  of  the  church  ;  and  the  whole  company  in  town 
*'  were  appealed  to,  for  a  confirmation  of  the  fact,  whom  the 
**  Cardinal  found,  by  their  zealous  devotion,  to  be  thorough 
'^  believers  of  the  miracle."  It  is  true,  that  the  company  in 
town  were  appealed  to,  by  those  ecclesiasticks  ;  but  it  is  also 
true,  that  De  Retz^  by  his  own  account,  seems  not  to  have  ask- 
ed any  man  a  question  on  the  subject.  He  acknowledges  in- 
deed, that  an  anniversary  festival,  instituted  in  commemora- 
tion of  the  miracle,  was  celebrated  by  a  vast  concourse  of  peo*. 
pie  of  all  ranks. 

**  Here,"  continues  the  essayist,  "  the  relater  was  aiso  con- 
**  temporary  to  the  supposed  prodigy,  of  an  incredulous  and 
**  libertine  character,  as  well  as  of  great  genius."  But  of 
what  weight,  in  this  affair,  is  either  the  genius  or  the  incre-. 
dulity  of  the  relater,  since,  by  Mr.  Hume's  Confession,  he  had 
no  faith  in  the  relation  ?  Strange  indeed  is  the  use  which  the 
essayist  makes  of  this  circumstance  ! 

''  What  adds  mightily"  says  he,  "  to  the  force  of  the  evidence, 
**  and  may  double  our  surprise  on  this  occasion,  is,  that  the 
*'  cardinal  himself,  who  relates  the  story,  seems  not  to  give 
*'  any  credit  to  it."  It  doth  not  in  the  least  surprise  me,  that 
the  cardinal  gives  no  credit  to  this  relation  ;  but  I  am  beyond 
measure  surprised,  that  Mr.  Hume  should  represent  this  cir- 
cumstance as  adding  mightily  to  the  force  of  the  evidence.  Is 
then  a  story  which  is  reported  by  a  man  of  genius,  the  mor« 
credible  that  he  doth  not  believe  it  ?  Or,  Is  it  the  more  incre- 
dible that  he  doth  believe  it?  What  would  the  author  have 
said,  if  the  cardinal  had  told  us,  that  he  gave  credit  to  the  re^^ 
lation  ?  Might  he  not,  in  that  case,  have  very  pertinentljr 
pleaded  the  great  genius,  and  penetration,  and  incredulity  of 
the  relater,  as  adding  mightily  to  the  force  of  the  evidence  ?  On 
that  hypothesis,  he  surely  might,  for  pretty  obvious  reasons. 
Uncommon  penetration  qualifies  a  man  for  detecting  fraud  ; 
and  it  requires  evidence  greater  than  ordinary  to  surmount  in- 
credulity. The  belief  therefore  of  such  a  person  as  the  cardi- 
nal, who  had  not  only  the  means  of  discovering  an  imposture^ 
as  he  was  contemporary  and  on  the  spot,  but  the  ability  to 
discover  it,  as  he  was  a  man  of  genius,  and  not  over-credulous  ; 
his  belief,  I  say,  would  evidently  have  been  no  small  presump- 
tion of  the  truth  of  the  miracle.  How  his  disbelief  can  be  in 
like  manner  a  presumption  of  its  truth,  is  to  me  incomprehen- 
sible. Ay  but,  rejoins  the  author,  *'  as  he  seems  not  to  give 
*'  any  credit  to  it,  he  cannot  be  suspected  of  any  concurrence 
**  in  the  holy  fraud."  Very  well.  I  am  satisfied  that  a  man's 
TESTIMONY  is  the  mere  to  be  regarded,  that  he  is  above  being 


Sect.  &  GOSPEI.  FULLY  ATTESTED.  4fr 

suspected  of  concurring  in  any  frauds  call  it  holy  or  unholy. 
But  I  want  to  know  why,  on  the  very  same  account,  his  opi- 
nion is  the  less  to  be  regarded  ?  For  my  part,  1  find  no  diffi- 
culty in  believing  every  article  of  the  narration  for  which  the 
cardinal  gives  his  testimony  :  notwithstanding  this,  i  may  be 
©f  the  same  opinion  with  him  ;  that  the  account  given  by  the 
dean  and  canons,  which  is  their  testimony,  not  his,  was  all  a 
fiction.  But  it  is  not  with  the  cardinal's  testimony  we  are 
here  concerned :  about  that  there  is  no  dispute.  It  is  with  his 
opinion.  Are  then  a  man's  sentiments  about  a  matter  of  facti 
I  must  insist  on  it,  the  less  worthy  of  regard,  either  because 
he  is  a  man  of  genius,  and  not  at  all  credulous,  or  because  he 
cannot  be  suspected  of  any  concurrence  in  a  holy  fraud  ?  Are 
they  the  more  improbable  on  these  accounts  ?  The  essayist, 
when  he  reflects,  will  be  the  last  man  in  the  world,  that  would 
assist  in  establishing  a  maxim  so  unfavourable,  not  only  ta 
candour,  but  even  to  genius  and  scept'cism  :  and  indeed  there 
are  few,  if  any,  that  would  be  greater  sufferers  by  it  thatl 
kitnself. 

But  leaving  this,  as  one  of  the  unfathomable  depths  of  the" 
essay,  1  proceed  to  the  other  circumstances.  "  The  miracle," 
says  the  author,  *•'■  of  so  singular  a  nature,  as  could  scarce 
**  admit  of  a  counterfeit."  He  did  well  at  least  to  use  the 
word  scarce  ;  for  if  every  visitant  was  as  little  desirous  of 
prying  into  the  secret,  as  the  cardinal,  nothing  could  be  more 
easily  counterfeited  :  "  And  the  witnesses  very  numerous,  and 
"  all  of  them,  in  a  manner^  spectators  of  the  fact,  to  which: 
**  they  gave  their  testimony,"  By  the  very  numerous  witnesses^ 
I  suppose  he  means  the  whole  company  in  town,  who  were 
appealed  to.  They  were  all,  in  a  manner^  spectators  of  the 
fact.  What  precise  abatement  the  author  intended  we  should 
make,  from  the  sense  of  the  word  i<pectators^  on  account  of  the 
qualifying  phrase,  in  a  manner^  I  shall  not  presume  to  deter- 
mine ;  but  shall  observe,  from  the  memoirs,  that  it  was  not 
so  much  as  pretended  by  the  canons,  that  any  of  the  citizens 
had  seen  the  miracle  performed  ;  it  was  only  pretended,  that 
they  had  seen  the  man  formerly  at  the  gate  of  the  church, 
wanting  a  leg.  Nor  is  it  alleged,  that  any  of  them  was  at 
more  pains  in  examining  the  matter,  either  before  or  after  the 
recovery  of  the  leg,  than  the  cardinal  was.  They  were  there- 
fore properh  no  spectators  of  the  fact.  The  phrase,  in  a 
manner^  ought  I  imagine  to  have  been  placed  in  the  end  of  the 
sentence,  which  would  have  run  thus  :  "  to  which  they,  in  a 
^^  manner  J  give  their  testimony  ;"  for  no  direct  testimony  was 
either  asked  of  them,  or  given  by  them;  their  belief  is  inferred 
from  their  devotion. 


478  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  IL 

I  have  been  the  more  particular  in  my  remarks  on  the  cir- 
cumstances of  this  stor)^,  not  because  there  was  need  of  these 
remarks  :  for,  though  to  the  essayist  the  relation  appeared 
very  memorable^  to  me,  and,  I  believe,  to  most  people,  it  ap- 
pears very  trifling ;  but  that  the  reader  might  have  this 
further  specimen  of  the  author's  talents  in  embellishing.  To 
the  above-mentioned,  and  all  other  such  idle  tales,  this  short 
and  simple  answer  will,  by  every  man  of  sense,  be  thought 
sufficient.  The  country  7uhere  the  miracle  Is  said  to  have  been 
wrought^  Is  Spain;  the  people  xvho  propagated  the  faith  of  Ity 
"Were  the  clergy.  Wh.'t  comparison,  in  point  of  credibility, 
can  be  made  between  miracles,  which,  with  no  visible  support 
but  their  own  evidence,  had  at  once  to  encounter,  and  did  in 
fact  overcome  the  abhorrence  of  the  priest,  and  the  tyranny 
of  the  magistrate,  the  insolence  of  the  learned,  and  the  bigotry 
of  the  superstitious :  what  comparison,  I  say,  can  be  made 
between  such,  and  any  prodigies  said  to  have  been  performed 
in  a  country,  where  all  the  powers  of  the  nation,  secular  and 
ecclesiastical,  the  literature  of  the  schools,  such  as  it  is,  and 
the  prejudices  of  the  people,  conspire  in  estsblishing  their 
credit ;  a  country  sunk  in  the  most  obdurate  superstition  that 
ever  disgraced  human  nature*,  a  country  where  the  awe  of  the 
inquisition  is  so  great,  that  no  person,  whatever  be  his  senti- 
ments, dares  mutter  a  syllable  against  any  opinion  that  hath 
obtained  the  patronage  of  their  spiritual  guides  ?  But  that  I 
may  not  be  accused  of  prepossession,  or  suspected  of  exagge- 
rating, I  shall  only  give  the  sentiments  of  two  eminent 
foreigners  (who  were  not  Protestants,  and  may  therefore  be 
supposed  the  more  impartial)  concerning  that  nation,  and  the 
influence  which  the  holy  tribunal  has  both  on  their  character 

*  This  perhaps  will  appear  to  some  to  be  too  severe  a  censure  on  a  country- 
called  Christian,  and  may  be  thought  to  reflect  nn  Christianity  itself.  I  do  not 
think  it  fairly  capable  of  such  a  construction.  That  the  corruption  of  the  best 
things  produces  the  worst,  hath  grown  intoaproverb;  and,  on  the  most  impartial 
enquiry,  I  do  not  imagine  it  will  be  found,  that  any  species  of  idolatry  ever 
tended  so  directly  to  extirpate  humanity,  gratitude,  natural  afFectior,  equity,  mutual 
confidence,  good  faith,  and  every  aiv.iable  and  generous  principle  from  the  human 
breast,  as  that  gross  perversion  of  the  Christian  religion  which  is  established  in 
Spain.  It  might  easily  be  shown,  that  the  human  sacrifices  offered  by  Heathens, 
had  not  half  tiie  tendency  to  corrupt  the  heart,  and  consequently  deserve  lot  to 
be  viewed  with  half  the  horrour,  as  those  celebrated  among  the  Spaniards,  with 
so  much  pomp,  and  barbarous  festivity,  at  an  auto  dafe.  It  will  not  surely  be 
affirmed,  that  our  Saviour  reflected  on  the  Mosaick  institution,  or  germi:  e  Ju- 
daism, when^ie  said.  Wo  untayou  scribes  and pharisees ,  hypocrites  ; for  ye  compass 
sea  and  land  to  make  one  proselyte,  and  lohcn  he  is  made,  ye  make  him  tvjofold 
more  the  child  of  hell  than  yourselves.  Ye:  ihe  words  plainly  imply,  thi^'  even 
Pagansy  by  being  converted  to  the  Judaism  that  was  then  professed,  were  tnade 
children  of  hell,  and  consequently  corrupted,  instead  of  being  reformed.  See 
Matth.  xxiii.  15. 


Sect.  5.        GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  479 

and  manners.  Voltaire*,  speaking  of  the  inquisition  as  estab- 
lished in  Spain,  says,  *'  Their  form  of  proceeding  is  an  infal- 
**  lible  way  to  destroy  whomsoever  the  inquisitors  please.  The 
*'  prisoners  are  not  confronted  with  the  informers  ;  and  there 
"  is  no  informer  who  is  not  listened  to.  A  publick  criminal, 
"  an  infamous  person,  a  child,  a  prostitute,  are  creditable 
*'  accusers.  Even  the  son  may  depose  against  his  father  ;  the 
"  wife  against  her  husband.  In  fine,  the  prisoner  is  compeiledl 
*'  to  inform  against  himself,  to  divine,  and  to  confess,  the 
*'  crime  laid  to  his  charge  j  of  which  often  he  is  ignorant. 
*'  This  procedure,' unheard  of  till  the  institution  of  this  court, 
"makes  the  whole  kingdom  tremble.  Suspicion  reigns  in 
"  every  breast.  Friendship  and  openness  are  at  an  end.  The 
"  brother  dreads  his  brother,  the  father  his  son.  Mence  taci- 
*'  turnity  is  become  the  characteristick  of  a  nation  endued 
"  with  all  the  vivacity  natural  to  the  inhabitants  of  a  warm 
"  and  fruitful  climate.  To  this  tribunal  we  must  likewise 
*'  impute  that  profound  ignorance  of  sound  philosophy,  in 
*'  which  Spain  lies  buried,  whilst  Germany,  England,  France, 
"  and  even  Italy,  have  discovered  so  many  truths,  and  enlarged 
"  the  sphere  of  our  knowledge.  Never  is  human  nature  so 
*'  debased,  as  when  ignorance  is  armed  with  power." — "  It  is 
"necessary,"  says  Montesquieu-|-,  in  the  humble  remonstrance 
to  the  inquisitors  of  Spain  and  Portugal,  "that  we  advertise 
"  you  of  one  thing  ;  it  is,  that  if  any  person,  in  future  times, 
*'  shall  dare  assert,  that  in  the  age  wherein  we  live,  the  Euro- 
"  peans  were  civilized,  you  will  be  quoted  to  prove  that  they 
*'  were,  barbarians,  and  the  idea  people  will  form  of  you,  will 
"  be  such  as  will  dishonour  your  age,  and  bring  hatred  on  all 
"  your  contemporaries." 

I  come  now  to  consider  the  miracles  said  to  have  been  per- 
formed in  the  church-yard  of  Saint  Medard,  at  the  tomb  of 
Abbe  Paris.  On  these  the  author  hath  expatiated  with  great 
parade,  exulting,  that  he  hath  found  in  them,  as  he  imagines, 
what,  in  respect  of  nunaber,  and  nature,  and  evidence,  may 
outvie  the  miracles  of  holy  writ.  Yet  shoidd  we  admit  them 
to  be  true,  how  they  can  be  considered  as  proofs  of  any  doc- 
trine, or  how  they  can  affect  the  evidence  of  the  miracles 
recorded  in  scripture,  it  will  not  perhaps  be  easy  to  discover. 
But  setting  that  question  aside,  I  propose  to  examine  their 
evidence  ;  and  that,  not  by  entering  into  a  particular  inquiry 
concerning  each  separate  fact  mentioned  in  Montgeron's  col- 
lection, as  such  an  inquiry  would  appear,  to  every  judicious 

*  EsSai  sur  i'h'istoire  generale,  chap.  118. 
f  De  I'eSprit  de  loi.v,  liv.  26,  chap.  13. 


48d  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  U. 

reader,  both  tedious  and  impertinent ;  but  by  making  a  few 
general  observations,  founded  in  unquestionable  fact,  and 
mostly  supported  even  by  the  authority  of  Montgeron,  that 
doughty  champion  of  the  Jansenist  saint*. 

I^ir.'it,  Let  it  be  remarked,  that  it  was  often  objected  by  the 
enemies  of  the  saint,  and  scarce  contradicted,  never  confuted, 
by  his  friends,  that  the  prostrations  at  his  sepulchre  produced 
more  diseases,  than  they  cured.  The  ingenious  author  lately 
quoted,  in  the  account  he  gives  of  the  affairs  of  the  church  in 
the  ninth  century,  taking  occasion  incidentally  to  mention  the 
miracles  of  the  Abbe,  speaks  of  this  circumstance,  as  a  thing 
universally  known,  and  undeniable-j-.  '•'-  I  should  not  take  no- 
"  tict,"  says  he,  '^'  of  an  epidemical  folly  with  which  the  peo- 
*'  pie  of  Dijon  were  seized  in  844,  occasioned  by  one  Saint 
*'  Bfiiignus,  who  threw  those  into  convulsions  who  prayed  on 
*'  his  tomb  ;  I  should  not,  I  say,  m^ention  this  popular  super- 
*'  stition,  had  it  riot  been  furiously  revived  in  our  days,  in  pa- 
"  rallel  circumstances.  It  seems,  as  if  the  same  follies  were 
''  destined  to  make  their  appearance,  from  time  to  time,  oa 
*'  the  theatre  of  the  world  :  but  got>d  sense  is  also  the  same  at 
^'  all  times  ;  and  nothing  so  judicious  hath  been  said,  concen*- 
"  ing  the  modern  miracles  wrought  on  the  tomb  of  1  knovr 
"  not  what  deacon  at  Paris,  as  what  a  bishop  of  Lyons  said, 
"  concerning  those  of  Dijon.  A  strange  saint  indeed,  that 
"  maims  those  who  pay  their  devoirs  to  him*  I  should  thinky 
"  miracles  ought  to  be  performed  for  the  curings  and  not  for  the 
''  inflicting  of  maladies^'' 

The  second  observation  is,  That  the  instances  of  persons 
cured  are  extremely  few^  compared  with  the  multitudes  of 
people  in  distress,  who  night  and  day  attended  the  sepulchre-, 
imploring  in  vain  the  intercession  of  the  saint.  The  crowds 
of  sick  and  infirm,  who  flocked  to  the  tomb  for  relief,  were, 
by  all  accounts,  innumerable  :  whereas  all  the  cures  which  the 
zealous  and  indefatigable  Montgeron  could  procure  vouchers 
of,  amounted  only  to  NineJ.  The  author  therefore  must  be 
understood,  as  speaking  with  great  latitude,  when  he  says, 

•  The  character  of  his  book  is  very  justly  and  very  briefly  expressed  in  Le  Sit' 
de  de  Louu  XIV.  in  these  words  :  "  Si  ce  livre  subsistait  un  jour,  et  que  les  autres 
"  fussent  perdus,  Ja  posterire  croirait  que  notre  siccle  a  ete  un  terns  de  barbarie/' 
chap  33. 

f  Essai  sur  I'histoire  generale,  chap.  21. 

\  It  must  be  owned  tha'  the  author  of  the  Recueil  after-mentioned,  hath  pre- 
sented us  with  a  much  greater  number  ;  but  let  it  be  remarked,  that  that  author 
doth  not  confine  himself  to  the  cures  performed  openly  at  the  tomb  of  the  deacon,' 
he  gives  us  also  those  rhat  were  wrought  i.:  the  private  chambers  of  the  sick,  by 
virtue  of  his  relicks,  by  images  of  him,  or  by  earth  brought  frr..  under  his  monu- 
ment Nor  is  the  collecnon  restricted  only  to  the  cures  effected  by  the  saint ;  it 
iiicludes  also  the  judgments  inflicted  by  him. 


S^t;^,  GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  481 

**  There  surely  never  was  so  great  a  number  of  miracles 
**  ascribed  to  one  person,  as  those  which  were  lately  said  to 
**  have  been  wrought  in  France,  upon  the  tomb  of  Abbe  Paris, 
''  the  famous  Jansenist,  with  whose  sanctity  the  people  were 
*'  so  long  deluded*."  If  thousands  of  diseased  persons  had 
applied  for  medicine  to  some  ignorant  quack,  in  the  assurance 
of  His  extraordinary  abilities,  would  it  be  matter  of  surprise 
to  a  reasonable  man,  that,  of  so  many,  eight  or  nine  should  be 
found,  whose  distempers  had  taken  a  favourable  turn,  whilst 
they  were  using  his  specificks,  and  had  thereby  given  counte- 
iiance  to  the  delusion?  I  think  it  would  be  matter  of  surprise 
that  there  were  so  few. 

I  shall  observe,  thirdly^  That  imposture  wzs  actually  detect- 
ed, and  proved  in  several  instances.  That  the  reader  may  be 
satisfied  of  this,  I  must  intreat  him  to  have  recourse  to  the 
Archbishop  of  Sens'  Pastoral  instructions  ;  a  book  which  M r» 
Hume  could  not,  with  propriety,  take  any  notice  of,  having 
positively  asserted  that  "  the  enemies  to  those  opinions,  in 
^  whose  favour  the  miracles  were  said  to  have  been  wrought, 
«  were  never  able  distinctly  to  refute  or  detect  them-j'."  This 
prelate,  on  the  contrary,  hath  not  only  given  a  distinct  refuta- 
tion of  some  of  these  pretended  miracles,  but  hath  clearly 
detected  the  deceit  and  little  artifices  by  which  their  credit 
was  supported.  I  intend  not  to  descend  to  particulars,  and 
shall  therefore  only  refer  the  reader  to  the  book  itself,  and  beg 
that  he  will  peruse  what  relates  to  the  cases  of  Jaeques  Lau-^ 
rent  Menedrieuz^  yean  Nivet^  Sieur  le  Doulx^  Laleu^  Anne  Cou- 
hn^  the  widow  de  Lorme^  as  well  as  Mademoiselle  le  Franc^  of 
whom  the  essayist  hath  made  mention  in  a  note.  In  this  pe- 
rusal, the  reader  will  observe  the  shameful  prevarications  of 
some  Jansenist  witnesses,  for  whom  Mr.  Hume  would  fain  apo- 
logize, by  telling  us  pleasantly,  they  were  tampered  with^..  I 
shall  only  add  on  this  head,  that  the  detection  of  fraud  in 
some  instances,  justly  brings  suspicion  on  all  the  other  in- 
stances. A  man  whom  I  know  to  have  lied  to  me,  on  several 
occasions,  I  shall  suspect,  on  every  occasion,  where  I  have 
not  access  to  discover,  whether  what  he  affirms  be  true  or  false. 
It  is  in  the  same  way  we  judge  of  the  spirit  and  conduct  of 
parties,  as  of  individuals. 

I  observe,  fourthly^  That  all  the  cures  recorded  by  Mont* 
geron,  as  duly  attested,  were  such  as  might  have  been  effected 
by  natural  means..  There  are  two  kinds  of  miracles,  to  which 
Mr.  Hume  hath  alluded  in  a  note,  though  he  does  not  directly 
Avafce  the  distinction.     One  is,  when  the  event,  considered  by 

*  p.  195.  t  ib.  \  p.  197.  in  the  note. 

Ppp 


^a^  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  l»art  II. 

itself,  is  evidently  preternafural.  Of  this  kind  are,  raising  the 
dead,  walking  on  water,  making  whole  the  maimed ;  for  by- 
no  natural  causes  can  these  effects  be  produced.  The  other 
kind  is,  when  the  event,  considered  by  itself,  is  natural^  that  is, 
may  be  produced  by  natural  causes,  but  is  denominated  mira- 
culous, on  account  of  the  manner.  That  a  sick  person  should 
be  restored  to  health,  is  not,  when  considered  singly,  preter- 
natural ;  but  that  health  should  be  restored  by  the  command 
'of  a  man,  undoubtedly  is.  Let  us  hear  the  author  on  this 
point :  "  Sometimes  an  event  may  not,  in  itself^  seem  to  be 
*'  contrary  to  the  la  vs  of  nature,  and  yet,  if  it  were  real,  it 
*'  might,  by  reason  of  some  circumstances,  be  denominated  a 
**  miracle  ;  because,  infact^  it  is  contrary  to  these  laws.  Thus, 
*'  if  a  person  claiming  a  divine  authority,  should  command  a 
"  sick  person  to  be  well,  a  healthful  man  to  fall  down  dead, 
*'  the  clouds  to  pour  rain,  the  winds  to  blow,  in  short,  should 
"  order  ir.any  natural  events,  which  immediatel}'  follow  upon 
"*  his  command  ;  these  might  justly  be  esteemed  miracles,  be- 
*'  cause  they  are  really,  in  this  case,  contrary  to  the  laws  of 
**  nature.  For  if  any  suspicion  remain,  that  the  event  and 
*'  command  concurred  by  accident,  there  is  no  miracle,  and  no 
*'  transgression  of  the  laws  of  nature.  If  this  suspicion  be 
"  retnoved,  there  is  evidently  a  miracle,  and  a  transgression 
*'  of  these  laws  ;  because  nothing  can  be  more  contrary  to 
*'  nature,  than  that  the  voice  or  command  of  a  man,  should 
*' have  such  an  influence*."  From  what  hath  been  said,  it 
appears,  that  these  two  kinds  of  miracles  must  differ  consi* 
derably  in  respect  of  evidence,  since  the  latter  naturally  gives 
room  for  a  suspicion,  which  is  absolutely  excluded  from  the 
former.  In  the  former,  when  the  fact  or  event  is  proved,  the 
miracle  is  unquestionable.  In  the  latter,  the  fact  may  be  prov- 
ed, and  yet  the  miracle  may  be  justly  questioned.  It  therefore 
merits  our  attention,  that  all  the  miracles  recorded  in  Montge- 
ron's  collection,  were  of  the  second  kind.  One  of  the  most 
considerable  of  those  cures,  was  that  of  Don  Alphonso  de  Pa- 
lacios,  who  had  lost  one  eye,  and  was  distressed  with  an  in- 
flammation in  the  other.  The  inflamed  eye  was  cured,  but  the 
lost  eye  was  not  restored.  Had  there  been  a  reproduction  of 
the  member  which  had  perished,  a  sufficient  proof  of  the  fact, 
would  have  been  a  sufficient  proof  of  the  miracle.  But  as  the 
case  was  otherwise,  the  fact  vouched  may  be  admitted,  without 
admitting  any  miracle.  The  cures  said  to  have  been  perform- 
ed on  those  patients  who  were  afflicted  with  paralytick  or  drop- 
sical disorders,  or  that  performed  on  Louisa  Coirin,  who  had  a 
tumour  on  her  breast,  will  not  appear  to  be  entitled  to  a  rank 

*  p.  181.  in  t,he  note.. 


Sect,  ^,         GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  48^- 

in  the  first  class.  As  little  can  the  cure  of  Peter  Gautier 
claim  that  honour.  One  of  his  eyes  had  been  pricked  with  an 
awl ;  in  consequence  of  which  the  aqueous  humour  dropped 
cut,  and  he  became  blind  of  that  eye.  His  sight  was  restored, 
whilst  he  paid  his  addresses  to  the  Abbe.  But  that  a  puncture 
in  the  cornea  of  the  eye  will  often  heal  of  itself,  and  that  the 
aqueous  humour,  after  it  hath  been  quite  lost,  will  be  recruit** 
ed,  and  consequently,  that  the  faculty  of  vision  will,  in  such  a 
case,  be  recovered,  is  what  every  oculist  can  assure  us  of.  The 
loss  of  the  watery  humour,  is  the  constant  effect  of  a  very 
common  operation  in  surgery,  couching  the  cataract.  Hence 
we  may  learn,  how  we  ought  to  understand  these  words  of  the 
author, "  The  curing  of  the  sick,  giving  hearing  to  the  deaf, 
"and  sight  to  the  blind,  were  every  where  talked  of  as  the 
'*  usual  effects  of  that  holy  sepulchre**"  As  therefore  the 
alleged  miracles  were  all  of  the  second  class,  it  is  onlv  from 
the  attendant  circumstances  we  can  judge,  whether  the  facts, 
though  acknowledged,  were  miraculous  or  not. 

In  order  to  enlighten  us  on  this  point,  I  observe,  fifthli}^ 
That  none  of  the  cures  were  instantaneous.  We  have  not  in-« 
deed  the  same  hold  of  the  deceased  Abbe,  as  of  a  living  pro- 
phet, who  pretends  to  work  miracles.  Those  who  attend  the 
latter,  can  know  exactly,  to  whom  he  grants  the  benefit  of  his 
miraculous  aid.  They  can  judge  also,  whether  the  supplicant's 
recovery  be  coincident,  with  the  prophet's  volition  or  com- 
mand. In  the  former  case,  we  have  not  access  to  judge  of 
either ;  and  consequently,  there  is  much  greater  scope  for 
fancy  and  credulity  to  operate.  No  voice  was  ever  said  to 
have  proceeded  from  the  tomb  of  the  blessed  deacon,  as  his 
votaries  styled  him.  They  obtained  no  audible  answer  to 
their  prayers.  There  are  however  some  circumstances,  by 
which  a  probable  conjecture  may  be  made  concerning  the 
efficiency  of  the  saint  in  the  cures  ascribed  to  him.  One  is, 
if  the  cure  instantaneously  followed  the  first  devotions  at  the 
tomb.  Supernatural  cures  differ,  in  this  particular,  as  much 
as  in  any  other,  from  those  which  are  effected  by  natural 
means,  that  they  are  not  gradually^  but  instantli/,  perfected. 
Now  of  which  kind  were  the  cures  of  St.  Medard  ?  From  the 
accounts  that  are  given,  it  is  evident,  that  they  were  gradual. 
That  some  of  them  were  sudden,  is  alleged ;  but  that  any  of 
them  were  instantaneous,  or  immediately  followed  the  first 
application,  is  not  even  pretended.  All  the  worshippers  at 
the  tomb,  persisted  for  days,  several  of  them  for  zveels,  and 
some  for  months  successively,  daily  imploring  the  interces- 

»  p.  195. 


484  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  II, 

sion  of  the  Abbe^  before  they  received  relief  from  their  com- 
plaints J  and  the  rehef  which  was  received,  is,  in  most  cases,  ^ 
acknowledged  to  have  been  gradual. 

I  observe,  sixthly,  1  hat  most  of  the  devotees  either  had 
been  using  medicines  before,  and  continued  to  use  them,  dur- 
ing their  applications  to  the  saint ;  or,  that  their  distempers 
had  abated^  before  they  determined  to  solicit  his  help.  7  hat 
the  Spanish  youth  had  been  using,  all  the  while  a  medicine 
prescribed  by  an  eminent  oculist,  was  proved  by  the  deposit 
tions  of  witnesses  ;  that  Gautier  had  begun  to  recover  his 
sight,  before  he  had  recourse  to  the  sepulchre,  was  attested, 
not  only  by  his  uncle,  but  even  by  himself,  when,  as  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Sens  informs  us,  he  signed  a  recantation  of  what  he 
had  formerly  advanced.  With  regard  to  the  rest,  it  appears 
at  least  probable,  from  the  circumstances  of  the  proof,  that 
they  were  using  the  prescriptions  of  the  physicians,  whom  they 
had  consulted  before  applying  to  the  deacon,  and  who  were 
afterwards  required  to  give  their  testimony,  concerning  the 
nature  and  malignancy  of  the  different  diseases. 

The  seventh  observation  is,  That  some  of  the  cures  attested 
were  incomplete.  This  was  manifestly  the  case  of  the  Spaniard, 
who  was  relieved  only  from  the  most  inconsiderable  part  of 
his  complaint.  Even  the  cure  of  Mademoiselle  Thibault,  which 
was  as  great  a  subject  of  exaltation  to  the  partisans  of  the  Abbe 
as  any  other,  was  not  complete.  Not  only  was  she  confined 
to  her  bed,  for  many  days,  after  the  decrease  of  her  dropsy  j 
but  she  still  remained  incapable  of  moving  two  of  her  fingers, 
Silva,  physician  to  the  Duke  of  Orleans  aitt  sted  this  ;  adding 
expressly,  th^t  he  could  not  look  on  her  as  being  cured. 

The  eighth  and  last  observation  i  shall  make  on  this  subjectis, 
That  the  relief  granted  some  of  them  was  but  temporary. 
This  was  clearly  proved  to  be  the  case  of  the  Spanish  gentle- 
man. That  soon  after  his  return  home,  he  relapsed  into  his 
former  malady,  the  prelate  I  have  often  quoted,  hath,  by  the 
certificates  and  letters  which  he  procured  from  Madrid,  put 
beyond  controversy.  Among  these,  there  are  letters  from  a 
Spanish  grandee,  Don  Francis  Xavier,  and  from  the  patient's 
uncle,  besides  a  certificate  signed  by  himself. 

After  the  above  observations,  I  believe,  there  will  be  no 
occasion  for  saying  much  on  this  subject.  The  author  has,  in 
a  note,  artfully  enough  pointed  out  his  aim,  that  it  might  not 
be  overlooked  by  the  careless  reader*.  "■  There  is  another 
''  book,"  says  he,  "  in  three  volumes,  (called  Recutil  des  mira- 
"  cles  de  PAbbe  Paris^J  giving  an  account  of  many  of  these 

*  p.  196. 


8ect.  5.        GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  i*sr 

*'  miracles,  and  aecompanied  with  prefatory  discourses,  which 
"  are  very  well  wrote*."  He  adds,  "  There  runs  however, 
"  through  the  whole  of  these  a  ridiculous  comparison  betwixt 
"  the  miracles  of  our  Saviour  and  those  of  the  Abbe  ;  wherein 

*  I  am  surprised  that  Mr.  Hume  hath  taken  no  notice  of  the  profound  erudition 
displayed  in  the  Recueil,  as  I  imagine  its  author  is  much  more  eminent  for  this  than 
for  his  talent  in  writing.  Besides,  his  learning  deserves  our  regard  the  more,  that 
it  is  of  a  kind  rarely  to  be  met  with  in  the  present  century.  Where  shall  we  find 
in  these  dregs  of  the  ages,  to  adopt  his  own  emphatical  expression,  such  an  exten- 
sive knowledge,  as  he  hath  exhibited,  of  all  the  monkish  and  legendary  writings 
of  the  darkest  and  most  barbarous,  or,  according  to  him,  the  most  devout  ages  of 
the  church  ?  Or  whence  else,  but  from  those  productions,  could  he  have  selected 
such  admirable  materials  for  his  work  ?  The  lives  and  writings  of  the  saints  are 
an  inexhaustible  treasure  for  a  performance  of  this  kind.  It  is  true,  St.  Matthew, 
St.  Mark,  St.  Luke,  and  St.  John,  have  said  little  to  his  purpose,  and  he  makes  as 
little  use  of  them.  But  is  not  this  want  richly  supplied  in  St.  Cudbert,  St.  Edildride, 
St.  ■  Wiliibrord,  St.  Baudri,  and  five  hundred  others  of  equal  note  !  One  thing  how- 
ever I  would  gladly  be  informed  of,  being  utterly  at  a  loss  to  account  for  it.  What 
entitled  this  author,  who  seems  not  to  be  deficient  in  a  veneration  truly  catholick 
for  ignorance,  superstition,  and  barbarism,  to  speak  contemptibly  of  Capgravius, 
Colganus,  and  Jacobus  de  Voragine  author  oi  The  golden  legend?  To  be  plain  with 
him,  this  is  a  freedom  which  doth  not  at  all  become  him  :  for  of  the  Jew  readers 
in  this  age,  who  happen  to  be  -icquainted  with  the  authorities  quoted  in  the  He- 
cueil,  most,  if  not  all,  will,  I  am  afraid,  be  of  opinion,  that  the  writers  last  men- 
tioned are  fully  as  credible,  not  less  famous,  and  much  more  ingenious,  than  many 
of  those  to  whom  he  is  so  greatly  indebted  for  his  m.c  st  extraordinary  narrative. 
Was  it  for  him  then  to  scandalize  these  few?  It  is  pity  that  a  writer  of  such  un- 
common reading  and  application  should  act  so  inconsistently,  and  undermine  his 
own  cause.  But  passing  his  literature,  which  is  unquestionable,  I  shall  give  the 
reader  a  specimen  of  his  talent  in  disputation  To  the  objection  that  had  been 
Wade,  that  the  miracles  of  the  deacon  were  gradual,  he  replies,  *'  So  was  the  crea- 
"  tion,  the  first  of  miracles,  which  employed  no  less  than  six  days."  As  all  that 
was  dune  jn  that  time,  is  comprehended  under  mie  name,  the  creatiox,  he 
concludes  very  sagely,  that  it  ought  to  be  denominated  one  miracle.  A  writer  of 
this  stamp  would  no  doubt  despise  the  answer  which  an  ordinary  reader  might 
ihuke  h'.m,— -/?rsf.  That  every  single  production  was  a  peifect  m\rsic\t,— secondly. 
That  nothing  could  be  more  instantaneous  than  those  productions,  God  said.  Let 
there  be  light,  and  there  was  light,  yc.—and  lastly,  That  the  world  was  not  created 
by  the  ministration  of  man,  nor  in  the  presence  of  men,  nor  in  order  to  serve  as  evi- 
dence ot  any  doctrine.  I  must  be  forgiven  to  remark,  that  in  the  whole  of  this 
author's  reply,  he  hath  unfortunately  mistaken  the  meaning  of  the  objectors,  who 
inteud  not  to  say,  that  God  may  not  perforru  a  miracle  gradually,  but  that  what 
IS  su  performed,  hath  not  the  same  evidence  of  its  being  miraculous,  as  what  is 
done  ill  an  instant,  and  therefore  cannot  so  well  serve  asevidenceof  any  doctrine. 
Now  that  the  miracles  of  Monsieur  de  Paris  were  intended  as  evidence  of  his  doc- 
trine, and  consequently  of  that  of  the  appellants  from  the  bull  Unigenitus,  he  every 
where  vehemently  maintains.  Another  specimen  of  this  author's  acuteness  and 
ingenuity  I  shall  give  in  a  literal  translation  from  his  own  v»?ords.  "  But,  it  will 
be  said,  ill  the  earliest  times  of  the  church,  miraculous  cures  weve  commonly 
•'  periected  in  an  instant.  True  ;  and  it  is  this  which  confirms  my  doctrine.  As 
"  it  was  ordinary  then  to  convert  great  sinners  all  of  a  sudden.  But  such  won- 
*•  ders  ill  both  kinds  are  for  the  commencement  of  the  church,  or  for  the  renova- 
"  tion  promised  her.  In  these  days,  which  the  French  clergy  have  justly  styled 
"  the  dregs  of  the  ages,  it  is  much  that  God  convert  many  sinners,  and  cure  many 
"  sick,  b>  slow  degrees,  at  the  same  time  that  he  shows  by  some  more  shining  ex- 
*'  amples  that  his  arm  is  not  shortened." 


48S  THE  MIRACLES  OP  THE  f'art  Ih 

♦*  it  is  asserted,  that  the  evidence  for  the  latter  is  equal  to  that 
''  for  the  former*."     At  first  reading,  one  is  apt,  with  surprise, 

tt-  ■ 

*  I  am  sorry  to  be  again  so  soon  laid  nnder  the  necessity  of  observing,  that  the 
essayist,  by  confiding  too  much  in  his  memory,  often  injures  the  writers  whom  he 
tjuotes.  It  is  but  doing  justice  to  the  author  of  the  RecueiU  to  observe,  that  he 
hath,  in  no  part  of  his  performance,  asserted  that  the  evidence  for  the  miracles  of 
Monsieur  de  Paris  is  equal  to  that  for  the  miracles  of  Jesus  Christ.  Perhaps  my 
reader  will  be  surprised  when  I  tell  him,  for  I  own  I  was  exceedingly  surprised 
when  I  discovered,  that  he  hath  not  only  in  the  plainest  terms  asserted,  but  stre- 
nuously  maintained,  the  contrary.  And  for  this  purpose  he  hath  employed  no 
less  than  twelve  pages  of  his  work.  He  introduces  the  subject  (Discourse  2.  part 
1.)  with  observing,  that  he  and  the  rest  of  his  party  had  been  traduced  by  their 
adversaries,  as  equalling  the  miracles  of  the  deacon  to  those  of  our  Saviour  The 
impiety  of  such  a  comparison  he  mentions  with  horrour,  and  treats  the  charge  as 
an  absolute  calumny.  Hence  he  takes  occasion  to  enumerate  those  peculiar  cir- 
cumstances in  the  miracles  of  our  Lord,  which  gave  them  an  eminent  superiority, 
not  only  over  those  of  his  saint,  but  over  those  of  every  other  saint,  or  prophet 
whatsoever.  To  this  enumeration  he  subjoins,  Tons  ceux  qui  recourent  a  Monsieur 
de  Paris  ne  sont  pas  gueris,  nous  dit-on ;  plusieurs  ne  le  sont  qu'en  partie,  oil 
d'une  maniere  lente,  et  moins  eclatante;  it  n'a  point  ressuscite  de  morts.  Que 
5'ensuit-il  de-la,  sinon  que  les  miracles  que  Dieu  a  operes  par  lui  sont  inferieurs  a 
ceux  que  notre  Seigneur  a  operes  par  lui  meme?  Nous  I'avouons,  nous  inculquons 
tette  verice.  "All  ihose,  we  are  told,  who  recur  to  Monsieur  de  Paris  are  not  cured  ; 
■^  several  are  cured  but  in  part,  or  in  a  slow  and  less  striking  manner ;  he  hath  raised 
*'  no  dead.  What  follows,  unless  that  the  miracles  which  God  wrought  by  him,  are 
*'  inferiour  to  those  which  our  Lord  wrought  by  himself  ?  We  acknowledge,  we 
"  inculcate  this  truth."  Afterwards,  speaking  of  evidence,  he  owns  aI»o,  that  the 
miracles  of  the  deacon  are  not  equally  certain  with  those  of  Jesus  Christ.  The 
latter,  he  says,  are  more  certain  in  many  respects.  He  specifies  the  natural  noto- 
xiety  of  some  of  the  facts,  the  publick  and  instantaneous  manner  in  which  most  of 
them  were  effecied,  the  number,  the  quality,  the  constancy  of  the  witnesses,  and 
the  forced  acknowledgment  of  his  most  spiteful  enemies.  He  concludes  this  subr 
ject  in  these  memorable  terms.  Au  reste  ce  que  je  viens  d'exposer  sur  la  superi> 
orite  des  merveilles  operes  par  le  Sauveur,  je  I'avois  reconnu  avec  plaisir  dans  le 
premier  discours.  J*y  ai  dit  en  propres  termes,  qu'il  y  avoit  une  difference  infinie 
'9itre  les  miracles  c(e  jfesus  Christ  et  ceux  de  Monsieur  de  Paris.  J'ai  promis  de  ne 
jamais  oublier  cette  difference,  et  j'ai  tenu  parole.  J'ai  remarque,  dans  le  lieu  ou 
il  convenoit  de  le  faire,  que  cette  difference  infinie  regardoit  I'evidence  des  prodiges 
aussi  bien  que  leur  grandeur  ;  et  que  les  incredules  pouvoient  nous  dire,  que  ceux 
que  nous  produisions  n'ont  point  le  meme  eclat  qu'ont  eu  ceux  de  notre  Seigneur. 
*'  Finally  what  1  have  just  now  evinced  on  the  superiority  of  the  wonders  per- 
«  forrried  by  our  Lord,  I  had  acknowledged  with  pleasure  in  the  first  discourse, 
'*  I  said  there  in  express  terms,  th«  there  was  an  infinite  difference  hefween  the 
}*  miracles  of  Jesus  Christ  and  those  of  Monsieur  de  Paris.  I  promised  never  to 
*•  forget  this  difference,  and  1  have  kept  my  promise.  I  remarked  in  its  proper 
♦*  place,  that  this  infinite  difference  regarded  the  evidence  as  well  as  the.  greatness  of 
'«  the  prodigies  ;  and  that  the  incredulous  might  object,  that  those  which  we  pro- 
"  duce,  have  not  the  same  lustre  with  those  of  our  Saviour.**  I  have  been  the 
more  particular  on  this  point,  not  so  much  to  vindicate  the  author  of  the  Secueil, 
as  to  show  the  sense  which  the  most  bigotted  partisans  of  the  holy  deacon  had  of 
the  difference  between  the  miracles  ascribed  to  him,  and  those  performed  by  our 
Lord.  I  cannot  avoid  remarking  also  another  difference,  I  mean  that  which  ap- 
pears between  the  sentiments  of  this  author  as  expressed  by  himself,  and  his  senti- 
ments as  reported  by  the  essayist.  It  is  indeed,  Mr.  Hume,  a  judicious  observa- 
■'tion  you  have  given  us  ;  that  we  ought  to  •  lend  a  very  academick  faith  to  evei^y 
»  repnrt  which  favours  the  passion  of  the  reporter;  in  whatever  way  it  strikes  ip!' 
-twith  his  natural  inclinatiena  »nd  propensijies,*  p.  ?.00;  ; 


jS6Ct.B,        GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  48? 

;to  imagine,  that  the  author  is  going  to  make  some  atonement 
for  the  tenets  of  the  essay,  by  turning  advocate  for  the  miracles 
of  Jesus  Christ;  and  by  showing,  that  these  are  not  affected 
by  his  doctrine.  But  on  this  point  we  are  not  long  held  in 
•suspense.  He  subjoins,  "  As  if  the  testimony  of  men  could 
'M  ever  be  put  in  tke  balance  with  that  of  God  himself,  who 

V  conducted  the  pen  of  the  inspired  writers."  An  ingenious 
piece  of  raillery  without  question.  Is  it  possible,  in  a  politer 
manner,  or  in  more  obliging  terms,  to  tell  the  Christian  world, 
^hey  are  fools ;  and  that  all  who  are  silly  enough  to  believe 
the  miracles  recorded  in  scripture,  are  not  entitled  to  be  argu- 
ed with  as  men  P  How  ?  They  are  so  absurd  as  to  believe  the 
scriptures  to  be  the  word  of  God,  on  the  evidence  of  the  mi- 
racles wrought  by  our  Lord  and  his  apostles  ;  and  that  these 
miracles  were  wrought,  they  could  not  believe  on  any  testimo- 
ny, less  than  that  of  God,  reporting  them  in  the  scriptures  i 
and  thus,  by  making  inspiration  and  miracles  reciprocally  foun- 
<iations  to  each  other,  they,  in  effect,  admit  both  without  any 
foundation  at  all.  After  this  handsome  compliment  to  the 
friends  of  holy  writ,  he  thinks  himself  at  liberty  to  be  very 
explicit  on  the  comparative  evidence  of  the  miracles  of  the 
Abbe,  and  those  of  Jesus  :  "  If  these  writers  indeed  were  to 
>*  be  considered  merely  as  human  testimony,  the  French  au- 
^  thor  is  very  moderate  in  his  comparison ;  since  he  mighty 
;*'  xvitk  some  appearance  of  reason^  pretend,  that  the  Jansenist 
'**  miracles  much  surpass  the  other,  in  evidence  and  authority.'* 
Was  ever  so  rough  an  assault,  preceded  by  so  smooth,  but  so 
insidious  a  preamble?  Is  it  then  still  the  fate  of  Jesus  to  be 
betrayed  with  a  kiss?  But  notwithstanding  chis  author's  decia- 
j-ation,  no  Christian  will  have  reason  to  dread  the  issue  of  i;he 
comparison,  Mr.  Hume  hath  not  entered  on  particulars,  nei- 
ther shall  I  enter  on  them.  I  should  not  incline  to  tire  my 
jreader  with  repetitions,  which,  in  a  minute  inquiry,  would  be 
inevitable.  I  shall  therefore  only  desire  him,  if  he  think  it 
needful,  to  peruse  a  second  time  the  eight  foregoing  observa- 
tions. Let  him  try  the  miracles  of  our  Lord  by  this  touch- 
stone ;  and  I  persuade  myself,  he  will  be  satisfied,  that  there  is 
p,o  appearance  of  reason  to  pretend,  that  the  Jansenist  miracles 
■imuch  surpass  the  other,  or  even  equal  them,  in  evidence  and 
l^authority. 

V  The  author  triumphs  not  a  little  in  the  observation,  that  the 
reports  of  the  prodigies  performed  by  the  deacon,  were  vio- 
lently opposed  by  the  civil  magistrate,  and  by  the  Jesuits,  (he 
inost  learned  society  in  the  kingdom.  He  could  see  the  im- 
portance of  this  circumstance  in  the  case  of  Abbe  Paris, 
though  not  in  fhe  case  of  Jesas  Christ.     But  that  (he  di|QS«t- 


4SS  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  I L 

ence  of  the  cases  as  well  as  their  resemblance,  may  better  ap- 
pear; it  ought  likewise  to  be  observed,  that  Jansenism,  though 
not  the  ruling  faction,  was  at  that  time  the  popular  faction  ; 
that  this  popularity  was  not  the  effect  of  the  miracles  of  the 
Abbe^  but  antecedent  to  those  miracles  ;  that,  on  the  contrary, 
the  Jesuits  were  extremely  unpopular  ;  and  that  many,  who 
had  no  more  faith  in  the  miracles  of  Saint  Medard  than  Mr, 
Hume  hath,  were  well  pleased  to  connive  at  a  delusion,  which 
at  once  plagued  and  mortified  a  body  of  men,  that  were  be- 
come ahnost  universally  odious. 

I  shall  only  add,  that  nothing  could  more  effectually  expose 
the  folly  of  those  pretensions,  than  the  expedient  by  which 
they  were  made  to  cease  :  In  consequence  of  an  order  from 
the  King,  the  sepulchre  was  inclosed  with  a  wall,  and  the  vo- 
taries were  debarred  from  apfproaching  the  tomb.  The  author 
says,  in  relation  to  this*,  "•  No  Jansenist  was  ever  embarrassed 
*■'•  to  account  for  the  cessation  of  the  miracles,  when  the 
"  churchyard  was  shut  up  by  King's  edict."  Certain  it  is,  that 
"  God  is  master  of  his  own  graces  and  works."  But  it  is 
equally  certain,  that  neither  reason  nor  the  gospel  leads  us  tox 
think,  that  any  human  expedient  will  prove  successful,  which 
is  calculated  to  frustrate  the  decrees  of  Heaven.  Both,  on 
the  contrary,  teach  us,  that  men  never  more  dirtci^y  promote 
the  designs  of  their  Maker  than  when  they  intend  directly  to 
oppose  them.  It  was  not  thus,  that  either  Pharisees  or  Sad- 
ducees,  Jews  or  Gentiles,  succeeded  in  their  opposition  to  the 
miracles  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles.  The  opinion  of  Gama- 
liel-j-  was  undoubtedly  judicious  :  If  this  counsel  or  this  work 
be  of  men^  it  will  come  to  nought ;  hut  if  it  be  of  God^  ye  can- 
not overthrow  it;  beware  therefore^  lest  ye  be  found  fighting 
even  against  God.  To  conclude  ;  Did  the  Jansenist  cause  de- 
rive any  advantage  from  those  pretended  miracles  ?  None  at 
all.  It  even  suffered  by  them.  It  is  justly  remarked  by  Vol- 
taire^;,  that  "  the  tomb  of  the  deacon  Paris,  proved  in  effect, 
*'  in  the  minds  of  all  people  of  sense,  the  tomb  of  Jansenjsm  :" 
How  unlike  in  all  respects  the  miracles  recorded  by  the  Evan- 
gelists ! 

Thus  I  have  briefly  inquired  into  the  nature  and  evidence, 
first  of  the  Pagan^  and  next  of  the  Popish  miracles,  mention- 
ed by  Mr.  Hume  ;  and  have,  I  hope,  sufficiently  evinced,  that 
the  miracles  of  the  New  Testament  can  suffer  nothing  by  the 
comparison  ;  that,  on  the  contrary,  as,  in  painting,  the  shades 
serve  to  heighten  the  glow  of  the  colours ;  and,  in  musick, 

*  p.  198.  in  the  note.  f  Acts  v.  38.  39. 

%  Siecle  da  Louis  XIV.  chap.  33. 


S6ct.  6.  GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  4^9 

the  discords  to  set  off  the  sweetness  of  the  harmony;  so  the 
vakie  of  these  genuine  miracles  is  enhanced  by  the  contrast  of 
those  paltry  counterfeits. 


SECTION   VL 

Abstracting  from  the  evidence  for  particular  facts^  -we  have  ir- 
refragable evidence^  that  there  have  been  miracles  in  former 
times ;  or  such  events  as,  zvhen  compared  with  the  present 
constitution  of  the  xuorld^  would  by  Mr.  Kiim,e  be  denominat- 
ed miracidous. 


\  READILY  concur  with  Mr.  Hume  in  maintaining,  that 
when,  merely  by  the  force  of  reason,  we  attempt  to  investi- 
gate the  origin  of  worlds*,  we  get  beyond  our  sphere,  and 
rtiust  infalliby  bewilder  ourselves  in  hypothesis  and  conjec- 
tare.  Reason  indeed  (v/hich  vainly  boasts  her  all-sufficiency) 
hath  sometimes  pretended  to  carry  men  to  this  amazing  height. 
But  there  is  ground  to  suspect,  that,  in  such  instances,  the 
ascent  of  reason,  as  the  author  elegantly  expresseth  itf,  hath 
been  aided  by  the  wings  of  imaginatio72.  If  we  will  not  be 
indebted  to' revelation,  for  our  knowledge  of  this  article, 
we  must,  for  aught  I  can  perceive,  be  satisfied  to  live  in  igno-  ' 
ranee.  There  is,  however,  one  question  distinct  from  the 
former,  though  akin  to  it,  which,  even  from  the  principles  of 
reason,  we  may  with  great  probability  determine.  The  ques- 
tion I  mean  is,  Whether  the  world  had  an  origin  or  not  ? 

That  there  hath  been  an  infinite,  eternal,  and  independent 
series  of  finite,  successive,  and  dependent  beings,  such  as 
itien,  and  consequently  that  the  world  had  no  beginning,  ap- 
pears, from  the  bare  consideration  of  the  thing,  extremely 
incredible,  if  not  altogether  absurd.  The  abstract  argument 
used  on  this  head,  might  appear  too  metaphysical  and  refined: 
i  shall  not  therefore  introduce  it ;  but  shall  recur  to  topicks 
which  are  more  familiar,  and  which,  though  they  do  not  de- 
ihonstrate,  that  it  is  absolutely  impossible  that  the  xvorld  hath 
existed  frojn  eternity,  clearly  evince  that  is  highly  improbable, 
orjather,  certainly  false.  These  topicks  I  shall  only  mention, 
as  they  are  pretty  obvious,  and  have  been  often  urged  with 
great  energy  by  the  learned,  both  ancient  and  modern.  Such 
are,  the  late  inveiition  of  letters,  and  of  all  the  sciences  and 

*  Essay  12.    Of  the  academical  or  sceptical  philosophy,  part  3. 
t  Essay  11.     Of  a  particular  providence  and  future  state. 
C^qq 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  I L 

arts  by  which  human  life  is  civilized ;  the  known  origin  of 
most  nations,  states  and  kingdoms  ;  and  the  first  peopling  of 
many  countries.  It  is  in  our  power  at  present  to  trace  the  his- 
tory of  every  people,  backwards  to  times  of  the  greatest  bar- 
barity and  ignorance.  Europe,  though  not  the  largest  of  the 
four  parts  into  which  the  earth  is  divided,  is,  on  many  ac- 
counts, the  most  considerable.  But  what  a  different  face  doth 
Europe  wear  at  present,  from  what  it  wore  three  thousand 
years  ago  ?  How  immense  the  odds  in  knowledge,  in  arts,  in 
policy,  in  everything  ?  How  easy  is  the  intercourse,  and  how 
extensive  the  acquaintance,  which  men  can  now  enjoy  witk 
all,  even  the  remotest  regions  of  the  globe,  compared  with 
what  was,  or  could  have  been  enjoyed,  in  that  time  of  dark- 
ness and  simplicity  ?  A  man  diiTers  not  more  from  a  child, 
than  the  human  race  now  differs  fromi  the  human  race  then. 
Three  thousand  years  ago,  appear  indeed  to  mark  a  very  disr 
tant  epoch  ;  and  yet  it  is  but  as  yesterday,  compared  with  eteri" 
nit^^  This,  when  duly  weighed,  every  thinking  person  will, 
acknowledge  to  be  as  strong  moral  evidence,  as  the  subject 
can  admit,  (and  that  I  imagine  is  very  strong)  that  the  world 
had  a  beginning. 

I  shall  make  a  supposition,  which  will  perhaps  appear  whim- 
sical, but  which  will  tend  to  elucidate  the  argument  I  am 
enforcing.  In  antedeluvian  times,  when  the  longevity  of  man 
was  such  as  to  include  some  centuries,  I  shall  suppose,  that  a 
few  boys  had  been  imported  to  a  desert  island,  and  there  left 
together,  just  old  enough  to  make  shift  to  sustain  themselves, 
as  those  in  the  golden  age  are  fabled  to  have  done,  on  acorns, 
and  other  spontaneous  productions  of  the  soil.  I  shall  sup- 
pose, that  they  had  lived  there  for  some  hundreds  of  years, 
had  remembered  nothing  of  their  coming  into  the  island,  nor 
<pf  any  other  person  whatsoever ;  and  that  thus  they  had  never 
had  access  to  know,  or  hear,  of  either  birth  or  death.  I  shall 
suppose  them  to  enter  into  a  serious  disquisition  concerning 
their  own  duration,  the  question  having  been  started.  Whether 
they  had  existed  from  eternity,  or  had  once  begun  to  be  ? 
They  recur  to  memory,  but  memory  can  furnish  them  nothing 
certain  or  decisive.  If  it  must  be  allowed  that  it  contains  no 
trace  of  beginning  of  existence,  it  must  also  be  allowed,  that 
it  reaches  not  beyond  a  few  centuries  at  most.  They  observe 
besides,  con. erning  this  faculty,  that  the  further  back  it  goes, 
it  becomes  the  more  indistinct,  terminating  at  last  in  confusion 
and  darkness.  Some  things  however  they  distinctly  recollect, 
and  are  assured  of.  They  remember,  they  were  once  of  much 
lower  stature,  and  of  smaller  size  ;  they  had  less  bodily 
strejigth  J  and  all  their  mental  faculties  were  weaker*    Th^^ 


Sect.  6.         GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  491 

know,  that,  in  the  powers  both  of  body  and  of  mind,  they  have 
advanced,  by  imperceptible  degrees,  to  the  pitch  they  are  now 
arrived  at.  These  considerations,  especially  when  fortified  by 
some  analogous  observatioi>s  they  might  have  made  on  the 
growth  of  herbs  and  trees,  would  have  shown  the  probability 
to  be  entirely  on  the  side  of  those  who  asserted,  that  their 
existence  had  a  beginning  :  And  though,  on  account  of  the 
narrow  sphere  of  their  knowledge  and  experience,  the  argu- 
ment could  not  have  appeared  to  them  in  all  its  strength,  we, 
from  our  long  acquaintance  with  nature,  even  abstracting  from 
our  knowledge  of  man  in  particular,  must  be  satisfied,  that  it 
would  have  been  strictly  analogical  and  just.  Exactly  similar^ 
the  very  same,  I  should  rather  say,  is  the  argument  I  have 
been  urging  for  the  origination  of  the  species.  Make  but  a 
few  alterations  in  phraseology  :  for  memory,  substitute  history 
and  tradition;  for  hundreds  o/' years,  say  thousands;  for  the 
powers  of  body  and  mind,  put  the  arts  and  sciences  ;  and,  v/ith 
these,  and  perhaps  one  or  two  more  such  variations,  you  will 
find  the  argument  as  applicable  in  the  one  case,  as  in  the  other. 
Now,  if  it  be  granted,  that  the  human  species  must  have  had 
a  beginning,  it  will  hardly  be  questioned,  that  every  other  ani- 
mal species,  or  even  that  the  universe,  must  have  had  a  begin- 
ning. 

But  in  order  to  prove  the  proposition  laid  down  in  the  title 
of  this  section,  it  is  not  necessary  to  suppose,  that  the  world 
had  a  beginning.  Admit  it  had  not,  and  observe  the  conse- 
quence. Thus  much  must  be  admitted  also,  that  not  barely  for  a 
long  continued^  but  for  an  eternal,  succession  of  generations, 
mankind  were  in  a  state  little  superiour  to  the  beasts  ;  that  of 
a  sudden,  there  came  a  most  astonishing  change  upon  the  spe- 
cies ;  that  they  exerted  talents  and  capacities,  of  which  there 
appeared  not  the  smallest  vestige,  during  the  eternity  preced- 
ing; that  they  acquired  such  knowledge  as  procured  them  a 
kind  of  empire,  not  only  over  the  vegetable  and  animal  worlds, 
but  even,  in  some  respect,  over  the  elements,  and  all  the  un- 
wieldy powers  of  matter ;  that,  in  consequence  of  this,  they 
were  quickly  raised,  much  more  above  the  state  they  had  been 
formerly  and  eternally  in,  than  such  their  former  and  eternal 
state  was  above  that  of  the  brute  creation.  If  such  a  revolu- 
tion in  nature,  such  a  thorough,  general,  and  sudden  change  as 
this,  would  not  be  denominated  miraculous,  it  is  not  in  my 
power  to  conceive  what  would.  I  could  not  esteem  it  a  greater 
miracle,  hardly  so  great,  that  any  species  of  beasts,  whicii  have 
hitherto  been  doomed  to  tread  the  earth,  should  now  get 
wings,  and  float  aboitt  in  the  air. 


492  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  II. 

Nor  will  this  plea  be  subverted  by  that  trite  objection.  That 
mankind  may  have  been  as  much  enlightened,  perhaps  myriads 
of  years  ago,  as  they  are  at  present ;  but  that  by  some  univer- 
sal calamity,  such  as  deluge  or  conflagration,  which,  after  the 
rota.iion  of  many  centuries,  the  earth  possibly  becomes  liable 
to,  all  traces  of  erudition  and  of  science,  all  traces  both  of  the 
elegant  and  of  the  useful  arts,  may  have  been  effaced,  and  the 
human  race,  springing  from  a  few  who  had  escaped  the  com» 
inon  ruin,  may  have  emerged  anew,  out  of  barbarity  and  igno- 
rance. This  hypothesis  doth  but  substitute  one  miracle  in  the 
place  of  another.  Such  general  disorder  is  entirely  uncon- 
formable to  our  experience  of  the  course  of  nature.  Accor- 
dingly the  destruction  of  the  world  by  a  deluge,  the  author 
hath  numbered  among  those  prodigies,  or  miracles,  which 
render  the  Pentateuch  perfectly  incredible. 

If,  on  the  contrary,  we  admit  that  the  world  had  a  beginning, 
(and  will  not  every  thinking  person  acknowledge,  that  this 
position  is  much  more  probable  than  the  contrary  ?)  the  pro- 
duction of  the  world  must  be  ascribed  either  to  chance^  or  to 
intelligence. 

Shall  we  derive  all  things,  spiritual  and  corporeal,  from  a 
principle  so  insignificant  as  blind  chance?  Shall  we  say,  with 
Epicurus,  that  the  fortuitous  course  of  rambling  atoms  hath 
reared  this  beautiful  and  stupendous  fabrick  ?  In  that  case, 
perhaps,  we  should  give  an  account  of  the  origin  of  things, 
which,  most  people  will  think,  could  not  properly  be  styled 
miraculous.  But  is  it,  because  the  formation  of  a  grand  and 
regular  system  in  this  way,  is  conformable  to  the  experienced 
order  of  nature  ?  Quite  the  reverse.  Nothing  can  be  more 
repugnant  to  universal  experience,  than  that  the  least  organick 
body,  not  to  mention  the  glorious  frame  of  nature,  should  be 
produced  by  such  a  casual  jumble.  It  has  therefore,  in  the 
highest  degree  possible,  that  particular  quality  of  miracles, 
from  which,  according  to  the  author's  theory,  their  incredibility 
results,  and  may  doubtless,  in  this  loose  acceptation  of  the 
word,  be  termed  miraculous.  But  should  we  affirm,  that,  to 
account  thus  for  the  origin  of  the  universe,  is  to  account  for 
it  by  miracle  ;  v*'e  should  be  thought,  I  am  afraid,  to  speak  both 
weakly  and  improperly.  There  is  something  here,  if  I  may 
so  express  myself,  which  is  far  beyond  the  miraculous  ;  some- 
thing, for  which  I  know  not  whether  any  language  can  afford  a 
proper  appellation,  unless  it  be  the  general  appellations  of 
absurdity  and  nonsense. 

Shall  we  then  at  last  recur  to  the  common  doctrine,  that  the 
world  was  produced  by  an  intelligent  cause  P  On  this  supposi- 
tion also,  though  incomparably  the  most  rational,  it  is  evident; 


Sect.  7.        GOSPEL  FUI.LY  ATTESTED.  *5» 

that  in  the  creation,  formation,  or  first  production  of  things, 
call  it  by  what  name  you  please,  a  power  must  have  been  eX" 
erted,  which,  in  respect  of  the  present  course  of  nature,  may 
be  styled  miraculous.  I  intend  not  to  dispute  about  a  word, 
nor  to  inquire,  whether  that  term  can,  in  strict  propriety,  be 
used  of  any  exertions  before  the  establishment  of  the  laws  of 
nature.  I  use  the  word  in  the  same  latitude,  in  which  the 
author  commonly  useth  it  in  his  reasoning,  for  every  event 
that  is  not  conformable  to  that  course  of  nature  with  v/hich 
we  are  acquainted  by  experience. 

Whether,  therefore,  the  world  had^  or  had  not,  a  beginning  i 
whether,  on  the  ^r^?  supposition,  the  production  of  things  be 
ascribed  to  chance,  or  to  design;  whether,  on  the  second,  in 
order  to  solve  the  numberless  objections  that  arise,  we  do,  or 
do  not,  recur  to  universal  catastrophes ;  there  is  no  possibility 
of  accounting  for  the  phenomena  that  presently  come  under 
our  notice,  without  having  at  last  recourse  to  miracles  ;  that 
is,  to  events  altogether  unconformable,  or,  if  you  will,  con- 
trary to  the  present  course  of  nature  known  to  us  by  experi- 
ence. I  cannot  conceive  an  hypothesis,  which  is  not  reducible 
to  one  or  other  of  those  above-mentioned.  Whoever  ima- 
gines, that  another  might  be  framed,  which  is  not  comprehend- 
ed in  any  of  those,  and  which  hath  not  as  yet  been  devised  by 
any  system-builder  ;  let  him  make  the  experiment,  and  I  will 
venture  to  prognosticate,  that  he  will  still  find  himself  clogged 
with  the  same  difficulty.  The  conclusion  therefore  above  de- 
duced, may  be  justly  deemed,  till  the  contrary  is  shown,  to  be 
not  only  the  result  of  one,  but  alike  of  every  hypothesis,  of 
which  the  subject  is  susceptible. 

Thus  it  hath  been  evinced,  as  was  proposed,  that  abstracting 
from  the  evidence  for  particular  facts,  we  have  irrefragable 
evidence  that  there  have  been,  that  there  must  have  been,  mi- 
racles in  former  times,  or  such  events,  as  when,  compared 
with  the  present  constitution  of  the  world,  would  by  Mr. 
Hume  be  denominated  miraculous. 


SECTION  VII. 

Revisal  of  Mr.  Hume's  examination  of  the  Pentateuch^ 

jryLLOWING  to  the  conclusion  deduced  in  the  foregoing 
section  its  proper  weight,  I  shall  also  take  into  consideration 
the  Pentateuch,  or  five  books  of  Moses  ;  or  rather,  I  shall  en- 
deavour impartialh''  to  revise  the  examination  which  those 


JLU  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  11, 

books  have  already  undergone  by  the  essayist*.  It  is,  in  this 
case,  of  the  greatest  importance  to  know,  whether  the  evidence 
on  both  sides  hath  been  fairly  stated. 

"  Here  then  we  are  first  to  consider  a  book,"  which  is  ac^ 
knowledged,  on  all  hands,  to  be  the  most  ancient  record  in  thie 
world,  "  presented  to  us,"  We  admit,  "  by  a  barbarous  and 
**»  ignorant  peoplej-,"  at  the  same  time  exhibiting  a  system  of 
Theism^  or  natural  religion,  which  is  both  rational  and  sublime; 
with  which  nothing  that  was  ever  compiled  or  produced,  on 
this  subject,  in  the  most  enlightened  ages,  by  the  most  learned 
and  polished  nations,  w^ho  were  unacquainted  with  that  book, 
will  bear  to  be  compared. 

Mr.  Hume  himself  must  allow,  that  this  remark  deserves 
attention,  since  his  reasoning  in  another  performance,  which 
he  calls.  The  natural  history  of  religion^  would  lead  us  to  ex- 
pect the  contrary.  He  there  maintains,  that  Polytheism  and 
Idolatry^  are,  and  must  be,  the  religion  of  rude  and  barbarous, 
and  consequently  of  ancient  :iges  ;  that  the  true  principles  of 
Theism^  or  the  belief  of  one  almighty  and  wise  Being,  the 
creator,  the  preserver,  and  the  ruler  of  heaven  and  earth, 
results  from  the  greatest  improvements  of  the  understanding 
in  philosophy  and  science.  To  suppose  the  contrary,  says  he 
3S  supposing,  that  "^  while  men  were  ignorant  and  barbarous, 
'*'  they  discovered  truth  ;  but  fell  into  errour,  as  soon  as  they 
*'  acquired  learning  and  politeness^."  This  reasoning  is  just, 
w^herever  religion  is  to  be  considered  as  the  result  of  human 
reflections.  What  account  then  will  the  author  give  of  this 
wonderful  exception  ?  That  the  reverse  is  here  the  case,  it  is 
impossible  for  him  to  dissemble.  The  people  he  himself  calls 
ignorant  and  barbarous  ;  yet  they  are  not  idolaters  or  poly- 
theists.  At  the  time  when  the  book,  which  he  examines, 
was  composed,  he  seems  to  think,  they  even  exceeded  them- 
selves in  barbarity  ;  yet  the  sentiments  of  these  barbarians  on 
the  subject  of  religion,  the  sentiments  which  that  very  book 
presents  to  us,  may  well  put  to  silence  the  wisdom  of  the 
politest  nations  on  earth.  Need  I  remind  Mr.  Hume  of  his 
express  declaration,  that  if  a  traveller  were  transported  into 
any  unknown  region,  and  found  the  inhabitants  ''  ignorant  and 
*'  barbarous,  he  might  before  hand  declare  them  idolaters,  and 
■*'  there  is  scarce  a  possibility  of  his  being  mistakenjl  ?"     I 

*p.205. 
•}•  The  aiitlior  adds,  "  wrote  in  an  age,  when  they  were  still "  more  barbarous.**' 
These  words  I  have  omitted  in  the  revisal,  because  they  appear  to  me  unintelli- 
gible. The  age  in  which  the  Pentateuch  was  v/ritten,  is  indirectly  compared  to' 
another  age,  he  says  not  what :  and  all  we  can  inake  of  it  is,  that  this  people  wetf 
mere  barbarous  at  that  time,  than  at  some  other  time  nobody  knows  when-. 
.„^  Natui's!  history  of  reUgion.  t.         j|  Ibiii. 


Seet.  r.        GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED. 

know  no  satisfactory  account  that  can  be  given  of  this  excep- 
tion, on  the  principles  of  the  essayist.  Nevertheless,  nothing 
is  more  easy,  than  to  give  a  satisfactory  account  of  it,  on  the 
Christian  principles.  This  account  is  that  which  is  given  by 
the  book  itself.  It  is,  that  the  religious  tenets  of  that  nation 
were  not  the  result  of  their  reasonings,  but  proceeded  from 
divine  revelation.  The  contrast  we  discern  betwixt  the 
Israelites,  and  the  ancient  GREEks  and  Romans,  is  remark- 
able. I'he  Greeks  and  Romans,  on  all  the  subjects  of  humairi 
erudition,  on  all  the  liberal  and  the  useful  arts,  reasoned  like 
men;  on  the  subject  of  religion,  they  prated  like  children. 
The  Israelites,  on  the  contrary,  in  all  the  sciences  and  arts, 
were  children;  but,  in  their  notions  of  religion,  they  were 
7nen;  in  the  doctrines,  for  example,  of  the  unity,  the  eternity, the 
omnipotence,  the  omniscience,  the  omnipresence,  the  wisdom, 
and  the  goodness  of  God  ;  in  their  opinions  concerning  provi- 
dence, and  creation,  the  preservation  and  government  of  the 
world ;  opinions  so  exalted  and  comprehensive,  as,  even  by 
tlie  author's  acknowledgment,  could  never  enter  into  the 
thoughts  of  barbarians. 

But  to  proceed  in  the  revisal :  We  have  here  a  book,  says 
the  essayist,  "  wrote  in  ail  probability  long  after  the  facts  it 
relates."  That  this  book  was  written  long  after  some  of  the 
facts  it  relates,  is  not  indeed  denied  :  that  it  was  written  long 
after  all,  or  even  most  of  those  facts,  I  see  no  reason  to  be- 
lieve. If  Mr.  Hume  meant  to  signify,  by  the  expression  quo- 
ted,  that  this  was  in  all  probability  the  case,,  why  did  he  not 
produce  the  grounds  on  which  the  probability  is  founded  ? 
Shall  a  bold  assertion  pass  for  argument  ?  or  can  it  be  expect- 
ed, that  any  one  should  consider  reasons,  which  are  only  iii 
general  supposed,  but  not  specified  ? 

He  adds,  *'  corroborated  by  no  conairrhig  testimony ;"  as 
little,  say  I,  invalidated  by  any  contradicting  testimony  ;  and 
both,  for  this  plain  reason,  because  there  is  no  human  coirpo- 
&ition,  that  can  be  compared  with  this,  in  respect  of  axTitiquity^ 
But  though  this  book  is  not  corroborated  by  ihe  concurrent 
testimony  of  any  coeval  histories,  because,  if  there  ever  were 
such  histories,  they  are  not  now  extant;  it  is  not  therefore 
destitute  of  all  collateral  evidence.  The  following  examples 
of  this  kind  of  evidence  deserve  some  notice.  The  division 
of  time  into  weeks,  which  hath  obtained  in  many  countries, 
for  instance  among  the  Egyptians,  Chinese,  Indians,  and  nor- 
thern barbarians  ;  nations  whereof  some  had  little  or  no  in- 
teteoorse  with  others,  and  were  not  even  known  by  name  t(> 


496  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  II. 

the  Hebrews*  :  the  tradition  which  in  several  places  prevailed 
concerning  the  primeval  chaos  from  which  the  world  arose 
the  production  of  all  living  creatures  out  of  water  and  earth, 
by  the  efficiency  of  a  supreme  mindj,  the  formation  of  man 

*  The  judicious  reader  will  observe,  that  there  is  a  great  difference  between  the 
«»o;'icur!-ence  of  nations,  in  the  divis-ioa  of  time  into  weeks,  and  their  concurrence 
la  the  other  periodical  divisions,  i.ito  years,  racnths,  days.  These  divisions  arise 
from  such  natural  causes,  as  are  every  where  obvious  ;  rhe  annual  and  diurnal  re- 
voiutions  of  the  sun,  and  the  revolution  of  the  moon.  The  division  into  iceeit, 
on  the  contrary,  seems  perfectly  arbitrary  :  consequently  its  prevailing  in  distant 
countries,  among  nucioi^s  which  had  no  communication  with  one  another,  afford 
a  strong  presumpuun,  that  it  muse  have  been  derived  from  some  tradition  (as  that 
ot  the  creation)  which  hath  been  older  than  the  dispersion  of  mankind  into  dif- 
ferent regions.  I;  is  easy  to  conceive,  that  the  practice,  in  rude  and  barbarons 
ages',  might  remain  through  habit,  when  the  tradition,  on  which  it  was  founded, 
was  entirely  lost ;  it  is  easy  to  conceive,  that  afterwards,  people  addicted  to 
idolatry,  or  who,  like  the  Egyptians,  had  become  proficients  in  astronomy,  should 
ass'gn  to  the  dilFerent  days  of  the  week,  ihe  names  of  their  deities,  or  of  the 
planets. 

jr  This  in  particular  merits  our  attention  the  more,  that  it  cannot,  by  any  ex- 
plication, be  made  :y  aa^ree  with  the  doctrine  which  obtained  among  the  Pagans, 
commonly  called  tbe  M)>tbo'.ogy.  Ovid  is  so  sensible  of  this  that,  when  he  men- 
tions a  deity  as  the  eificienc  cause  of  the  creation,  he  leaves  him,  as  it  were,  de- 
tached from  those  of  the  popular  system,  which  it  was  his  business  as  a  poet  to 
deliver,  being  at  a  loss  what  name  to  give  him,  or  what  place  in  nature  to  assign 
him.  Quisquis  suit  ille  deorum.  Whichever  of  the  gods  it  ivas.  He  well  knew 
that,  in  all  the  catalogue  of  their  divinities,  the  god  who  madethe  world  was 
not  to  be  found>  that  these  divinities  themselves  were,  on  the  contrarj",  produced 
out  of  the  chaos,  as  well  as  men  and  beasts.  Mr.  Hume  in  his  Natural  history  of 
religion,  IV.  remarks  this  conduct  in  Ovid,  and  ascribes  it  to  his  having  lived  in  a 
learned  age,  a,nd  having  been  instructed  by  philosophers  in  the  principle  of  a 
ilivine  formation  of  the  world.  For  my  part,  I  very  much  question,  whether  any 
rtatiort  was  ever  yet  indebted,  for  this  priuciple,  to  the  disquisitions  of  philoso- 
phers. Had  this  opinion  never  been  heard  of,  till  the  Augustan  age,  it  might 
indeed  have  been  suspected,  that  it  was  the  daughter  of  philosophy  and  science, 
bat  so  far  is  this  from  being  the  case,  that  some  vestiges  of  it  may  be  traced  even 
in  the  earliest,  and  most  ignorant  times.  Thaies  the  Milesian,  who  lived  many 
centuries  before  Ovid,  had  as  Cicero,  in  his  first  book  De  natura  deorum,  informs 
us,  attributed  the  origin  of  all  things  to  God.  Anaxagoras  had  also  denominated 
the  forming  principle,  which  severed  the  elements,  created  the  world,  and  brought 
order  out  of  confusion,  intelligence  or  mind.  It  is  therefore  much  more  probable 
that  these  ancients  owed  this  doctrine  to  a  tradition  handed  down  from  the 
earliest  ages,  which  even  all  the  absurdities  of  the  theology  they  had  embraced 
had  not  been  able  totally  to  erase,  though  these  absurdities  could  never  be  made 
t(J  coalesce  with  this  doctrine.  At  the  same  time  I  acknowledge,  that  there  i» 
something  so  noble  and  so  rational  in  the  principle,  Ihat  the  viorld  mai  produce^ 
by  an  intelligent  cause,  that  sound  philosophy  will  ever  be  ready  to  adopt  it,  when 
once  it  is  proposed.  But  that  this  opinion  is  not  the  offspring  of  philosophy,  may 
be  reasonably  deduced  from  this  consideration  also,  that  they  were  not  the  most 
lightened  or  philosophick  nations,  amongst  whom  it  was  maintained  in  greatest 
pOi-ity.  I  speak  not  of  the  Hebttws.  Even  the  Parthians,  Medes  and  Persians, 
whom  the  Greeks  considered  as  barbarians,  were  genuine  theists,  and  notwith- 
standing many  superstitious  practices  which  prevailed  among  them,  they  held  the 
belief  of  one  eter-nal  God  the  creator  and  the  lord  of  the  universe  If  this  prmci- 
ple  is  to  be  derived  from  the  utmost  improvement  of  the  mind  in  ratiocination  and 
science,  which  is  Mr.  Hume's  hypothesis,  the  phenomenon  just  now  observed  is 


Sect,  ii  GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  49f 

last  of  all,  in  the  image  of  God,  and  his  being  vested  with 
dominion  over  the  other  animals,  the  primitive  state  of  inno- 
cence and  happiness  :  the  subsequent  degeneracy  of  mankind: 
their  destruction  by  a  flood  :  and  the  preservation  of  one 
family  in  a  vessel.  Nay,  which  is  still  stronger,  I  might  plead 
the  vestiges  of  some  such  catastrophe  as  the  deluge,  which  the 
shells  and  other  marine  bodies,  that  are  daily  dug  out  of  the 
bowels  of  the  earth,  in  places  remote  from  the  sea,  do  clearly 
exhibit  to  us  :  I  might  urge  the  traces,  which  still  remain  in 
ancient  histories,  of  the  migration  of  people  and  of  science 
from  Asia  (which  hath  not  improperly  been  styled  the  cradle 
of  the  arts)  into  many  parts  both  of  Africa  and  Europe  :  I 
might  plead  the  coincidence  of  those  migrations,  and  of  the 
origin  of  states  and  kingdoms,  with  the  time  of  the  dispersion 
of  the  posterity  of  Noah. 

But  to  return  :  The  author  subjoins,  "  resembling  those  fa- 
"  bulous  accounts,  which  every  nation  gives  of  its  origin." 
It  is  unluckily  the  fate  of  holy  writ  with  this  author  that  both 
its  resemblance,  and  its  want  of  resemblance,  to  the  accounts 
of  other  authors,  are  alike  presumptions  against  it.  He  hath 
not  indeed  told  uS)  wherein  it  resembles  fabulous  accounts  : 
and,  for  my  part,  though  the  charge  were  just  I  should  ima- 
gine, little  or  nothing  to  the  disadvantage  of  the  Pentateuch, 
could  be  deduced  from  it.  It  is  universally  agreed  among  the 
learned,  that  even  the  most  absurd  fables  of  idolaters,  derive 
their  origin  from  facts,  which  having  been,  in  barbarous  ages, 
transmitted  only  by  oral  tradition,  have  come  at  length  to  be 
grossly  corrupted  and  disfigured.  It  is  nevertheless  probable^ 
that  such  fictions  would  still  retain  some  striking  features  of 

unaccountable.  If  on  the  contrary,  it  is  to  be  derived  originally  from  revelationj 
preserved  by  tradition,  through  successive  generations,  nothing  can  move  easily 
be  accounted  for.  Traditions  are  always  longest  retained,  and  n;cst  purely  trans- 
initted,  in  or  near  the  place  where  they  were  first  received,  and  amongst  a  people 
who  possess  a  strong  attachment  to  their  ancient  laws  and  custom?.  Migrations 
into  distant  countries,  mixture  of  ditierent  nations,  revolutions  in  government 
and  rnanners,  yea  and  ingenuity  itself,  all  contribute  to  corrupt  tiaditiou,  ami  do 
sometimes  wholly  efface  it.  This  1  take  to  be  the  only  admissible  acccurt,  why 
so  rational  and  so  philosopkical  a  principle  prevailed  most  in  age?  and  countries 
in  which  reason  and  philosophy  seemed  to  be  but  in  their  infancy.  The  notior, 
that  the  Greeks  borrowed  their  o])inions  on  this  subject  from  the  books  of  Mo- 
ses,  a  notion  for  which  some  Jewish  writers,  some  ChriFtian  fathers,  ard  even 
some  modems  have  warmly  contended,  appears  void  of  all  foundation.  These 
opinions  in  Greece  as  hath  been  observed,  were  of  a  very  early  date ;  v.  htieas 
that  there  existed  such  a  people  as  the  Jews,  seems  scarce  to  have  been  known 
there  till  about  the  time  of  the  Macedonian  conquests.  No  sooner  were  they 
Icnown  than  they  were  hated,  and  their  laws  and  customs  universally  despised. 
Nor  is  there  the  shadow  of  reason  to  think,  that  the  Greeks  knew  any  thn  g  of 
the  Mcred  writings  till  a  considerable  time,  afterwards,  when  that  version  of  thelh 
was  made  into  their  language  which  is  called  The  tramlatian  of  the  ^(xcntji. 

R  r  r 


4^8  THE  MIRACLES  OF  THE  Part  11. 

those  truths,  from  which  they  sprung.  And  if  the  books  of 
Moses  resemble,  in  any  thing,  the  fabulous  accounts  of  Oiher 
nations,  it  would  not  perhaps  be  difficalt  to  prove,  that  they 
resemble  only  whatever  is  least  fabulous  in  these  accounts. 
That  this  will  be  found  to  be  the  case,  we  may  reasonably  pre- 
sume, even  from  what  hath  been  observed  already  ;  and  if  so, 
the  resemblance,  so  far  from  being  an  argument  against  those 
books,  is  evidently  an  argument  in  their  favour.  In  order  to 
remove  any  doubt  that  may  remain  on  this  head,  it  ought  to 
be  attended  to,  that,  in  a  number  of  concurrent  testimonies, 
(where  there  could  have  been  no  previous  concert)  there  is  a 
probability  independent  of  that  which  results  from  our  faith  IQ 
the  witufsses  .  nav,  should  the  witnesses  be  of  such  a  character 
as  to  merit  no  faith  ar  ail.  This  probabilit)  ariseth  from  the  con- 
currence itself.  Thai  such  a  concurrence  should  spring  frona 
chance^  is  as  one  to  infinite,  in  other  words,  morally  impossi- 
ble :  if  therefore  concert  be  excluded,  there  remains  no  other 
cause  but  the  reality  of  the  fact. 

It  is  true,  that  "  upon  reading  this  book,  we  find  it  full  of 
"  prodigies  and  miracles :"  but  it  is  also  true,  that  many  of 
those  miracles  are  such,  as  the  subject  it  treats  of,  must  una- 
voidably make  us  expect.  For  a  proof  of  this  position,  I 
need  but  refer  the  reader  to  the  principles  established  in  the 
preceding  section.  No  book  in  the  world  do  we  find  written 
in  a  more  simple  st}le  ;  no  where  does  there  appear  in  it,  the 
least  affectation  of  ornament;  yet  nowhere  else  is  the  Almighty 
represented,  as  either  acting  or  speaking  in  a  manner  so  be- 
coming the  eternal  ruler  of  the  world.  Compare  the  account 
of  the  CREATION  which  is  given  by  Moses^  with  the  ravings  of 
Sanchoniatho  the  Phenician  philosopher,  which  he  had  digni- 
fied with  the  title  of  cosmogony:  or  compare  it  with  the 
childish  extravagancies  of  the  Greek  and  Latin  poets,  so  just- 
ly likened  by  the  author  to  a  sick  man^s  dreams*;  and  then  say, 
whether  any  person  of  candour  and  discernment  will  not  be  dis- 
posed to  exclaim  in  the  word,  of  the  prophet.  What  is  the 
CHAr  F  to  the  wHEATf!  The  account  is  what  we  should  call  i» 
reference  to  experience,  miraculous.  But  was  it  possible  it 
should  be  otherwise  ?  I  believe  the  greatest  infidel  will  not 
deny,  that  it  is  at  least  as  plausible  an  opinion  that  the  world 
had  a  beginning,  as  that  it  had  not.  If  it  had,  can  it  be  ima- 
ginedby  anyman  in  his  senses,  that  that  particular  quality  should 
be  an  objection  to  the  narrative,  which  he  previously  knows  it 
must  have?    Must  not  the  first  production  of  things,  the  ori-, 

•  Natural  history  of  religion.  XV. 
t  JcF.  xxiii.  28. 


jSect.7.  GOSPEL  FULLY  ATTESTED.  499 

ginal  formation  of  animals  and  vegetables,  require  exertions 
of  power,  whit.h,  in  preservation  and  propagation,  can  never 
be  exemplified? 

It  will  perhaps  be  objected,  That  if  the  miracles  continued 
no  longer,  and  extended  no  further,  than  the  necessit\  of 
creation  required,  this  reasoning  would  be  just ;  but  that  in 
fact  they  both  continued  much  longer,  and  extended  much 
further.  The  answer  is  obvious  :  it  is  impossible  for  us  to 
judge,  how  far  the  necessity  of  the  case  required.  Immedi- 
ately after  the  creation,  things  must  have  been  in  a  state  ve- 
ry different  from  that  which  they  are  in  at  present.  Hon  I'ng 
that  state  might  continue,  we  have  not  the  means  of  dis,r;\cr- 
ing :  but  as,  in  human  infancy,  it  is  necessary  that  the  feeble 
creature  should,  for  some  time,  be  carried  in  the  nurse's  arms, 
and  afterwards,  by  the  help  of  leading  strings,  be  kept  from 
falling,  before  he  acquire  strength  to  walk  ;  it  is  not  unlike- 
ly, that  in  the  infancy  of  the  world,  such  interpositions  should 
be  more  frequent  and  requisite,  till  nature  attaining  a  certain 
maturity,  those  laws  and  that  constitution  should  be  establish* 
ed,  which  we  now  experience.  It  will  greatly  strengthen  this 
conclusion,  to  reflect,  that  in  every  species  of  natural  produc- 
.^itions,  with  which  we  are  acquainted,  we  invariably  observe  a 
similar  feebleness  in  the  individuals  on  their  first  appearance, 
-and  a  similar  gradation  towards  a  state  of  greater  perfection 
and  stability.  Besides,  if  we  acknowledge  the  necessity  of 
the  exertion  of  a  power,  which  only  in  reference  to  our  expe- 
rience is  called  miraculous,  the  question,  as  is  well  observed 
by  the  judicious  prelate  formerly  quoted*,  "•  whether  this  pow- 
*'  er  stopped  immediately,  after  it  had  made  man,  or  went  on 
*'  and  exerted  itself  farther,  is  a  question  of  the  same  kind, 
"  as  whether  an  ordinary  power  exerted  itself  in  such  a  parti- 
"  cular  degree  and  manner,  or  not."  It  cannot,  therefore,  if 
we  think  reasonably  on  this  subject,  greatly  astonish  us,  that 
such  a  book  should  give  "  an  account  of  a  state  of  the  world, 
*'  and  of  human  nature,  entirely  different  from  the  present  j 
*'  of  our  fall  from  that  state  ;  of  the  age  of  man  extended  to 
*'  near  a  thousand  years ;  and  of  the  destruction  of  the  world 
"  by  a  deluge." 

Finally,  if,  in  such  a  book,  mingled  with  the  excellencies 
I  have  remarked,  there  should  appear  some  difficulties,  soirle 
things  for  which  we  are  not  able  to  accoimt ;  for  instance, 
*'  the  arbitrary  choice  of  one  people,  as  the  favourites  of  Hea- 
*' yen  ;  and  their  deliverance  from  bondage  by  prodigies  the 
'*  most  astonishing  imaginable  ;*'  is  there  any  thing  more  ej.- 

•  Analogj  of  religioDj  ib^t.  part2.  chap.  3.  sect.  2. 


5D0  THE  MIRACLES,  Ssfc.  Part  II. 

traordinary  here,  than,  in  a  composition  of  this  nature,  we 
might  have  previously  expected  to  find  ?  We  must  be  immo- 
derately conceited  of  our  own  understandings,  if  we  imagine 
otherwise.  Those  favourites  of  Heaven,  it  must  be  likewise 
owned,  are  the  countrymen  of  the  writer  ;  but  of  such  a  wri- 
ter, as  of  all  historians  or  annalists,  ancient  or  modern,  shows 
the  least  disposition  to  flatter  his  countrymen.  Where,  I  pru) , 
do  we  find  him,  either  celebrating  their  virtues,  or  palliating 
their  vices  ;  either  extolling  their  genius,  or  magnifying  th^ir 
exploits  ?  Add  to  all  these,  that,  in  every  thing  which  is  not 
expressly  ascribed  to  the  interposal  of  Heaven,  the  relation  is 
in  itself  plausible,  the  incidents  are  natural,  the  characters  arid 
manners  such  as  are  admirably  adapted  to  those  early  ages  of 
the  world.  In  these  particulars,  there  is  no  affectation  of  the 
marvellous ;  there  are  no  "  descriptions  of  sea  and  land  mon- 
*'  sters ;  no  relations  of  wonderful  adventures,  strange  men^ 
"  and  uncouth  manners*."  r 

When  all  these  things  are  seriously  attended  to,  I  persuade 
myself,  that  no  unprejudiced  person  will  think,  that  the  Pen- 
tateuch bears  falsehood  on  the  face  of  it,  and  deserves  to  be 
rejected  without  examination.  On  the  contrary,  every  unpre- 
judiced person  will  find  (I  say  not,  that  its  falsehood  would  be 
more  miraculous,  than  all  the  miracles  it  relates  ;  this  is  a 
language  which  I  do  not  understand,  and  which  only  serves 
to  darken  a  plain  question  ;  but  I  say,  he  will  find)  very  many 
and  very  strong  indications  of  authenticity  and  truth  ;  ancl 
will  conclude,  that  all  the  evidences,  both  intrinsick  and  ex- 
trinsick,  by  which  it  is  supported,  ought  to  be  impartially  can- 
vassed. Abundant  evidences  there  are  of  both  kinds  ;  some 
hints  of  them  have  been  given  in  this  section  ;  but  to  consi- 
der them  fully,  falls  not  within  the  limits  of  my  present  pur- 
pose. 

•  p.  185. 


CONCLUSION. 


W  HAT  is  the  sum  of  all  that  hath  been  now  discussed?  It 
is  briefly  this  :  That  the  author's  favourite  argument^  of  which 
he  boasts  the  discovery^  is  founded  in  errour*^  is  managed  -with 
sophistry\^  and  is  at  last  abandoned  by  its  inventorXt  as  fit  only 
for  show^  not  for  use  ;  that  he  is  not  more  successful  in  the  col- 
lateral arguments  he  employs  ;  particularly^  that  there  is  no  pe- 
culiar presumption  against  religious  miracles\\ ;  that  on  the 
contrary^  there  is  a  peculiar  presumption  in  their  favour^;  that 
the  general  maxim^  whereby  he  would  enable  us  to  decide  betwixt 
opposite  miracles^  -when  it  is  stript  of  the  pompous  diction^  that 
serves  it  at  once  for  decoration^  and  for  disguise^  is  discovered 
to  be  no  other  than  an  identical  proposition^  which-,  as  it  conveys 
no  knowledge^  can  be  of  no  service  to  the  cause  of  truth**  ;  that 
there  is  no  presumption^  arising  either  from  human  natureff^ 
or  from  the  history  of  mankind\^^  agairist  the  miracles  said  to 
have  been  wrought  in  proof  of  Christianity  ;  that  the  evidence 
of  these  is  not  subverted  by  those  miracles^  which  historians  of 
other  religions  have  recorded\\\\ ;  that  neither  the  Pagan\\, 
nor  the  Popish***  miracles^  on  which  he  hath  expatiated^  will 
bear  to  be  compared  -with  those  of  holy  writ ;  that.,  abstracting 
from  the  evidence  for  particular  facts.,  xve  have  irrefragable  evi- 
dence^ that  there  have  been  miracles  in  former  times'\-\\  ;  and., 
lastly,  that  his  examination  of  the  Pentateuch  is  both  partial 
and  imperfect^  and  consequently  stands  in  need  of  a  revisalX^X, 
"  Our  most  holy  rtligion,"  says  the  author  in  the  conclu- 
sion of  his  essay,  "  is  founded  on  faith,  not  on  reason  ;  and 
*'  it  is  a  sure  method  of  exposing  it,  to  put  it  to  such  a  trial, 
*'  as  it  is  by  no  means  fitted  to  endure."  If,  by  our  most  holy 
religion,  we  are  to  understand  the  fundamental  articles  of  the 
Christian  system,  these  have  their  foundation  in  the  nature 
and  decrees  of  God ;  and,  as  they  are  antecedent  to  our  faith 
or  reasonings,  they  must  be  also  independent  of  both.  If 
they  are  true,  our  disbelief  can  never  make  them  false  ;  if  they 
are  false,  the  belief  of  all  the  world  will  never  make  them 
true.  But  as  the  only  question  between  Mr.  Hume  and  the 
defenders  of  the  gospel,  is.  Whether  there  is  reason  to  believe 

•  Part  I.  sect.  1.     '  +  Sect  2.  |  Sec!.  .3.  |!  Sect.  4. 

S  Sect.  5.  **  Sect.  6.  tt  t*art  2.  sect.  1 .      :j^  Sect.  2. 

nil  Pan2.  sec!.3.  \\  Sect.  5.  *•*  Sect.  6.  ttt  !^«i   F- 


those  articles  ?  he  can  only  mean  by  our  most  holy  religion^  o\S^ 
belief  of  the  Christian  docttine:  and  concerning  this  belief  we 
are  told,  that  it  is  founded  on  faiths  not  on  reason  ;  that  is,  our 
faith  is  founded  on  our  faith ;  in  other  words,  it  hath  no 
foundation,  it  is  a  mere  chimera,  the  creature  of  a  distemper- 
ed brain.  I  say  not  on  the  contrary,  that  our  most  holy  reli- 
gioti  is  founded  on  reason^  because  this  expression,  in  my  opi- 
nion, is  both  ambiguous  and  inaccurate  ;  but  I  say  that  we 
have  sufficient  reason  for  the  belief  of  our  religion  ;  or,  to 
express  myself  in  the  words  of  an  apostle,  that  the  Christian, 
if  it  is  not  his  own  fault,  may  be  ready  always  to  give  an  an- 
szuer  to  every  man^  that  asketh  him  a  reason  of  his  hope. 

So  far  therefore  am  I  from  being  afraid  of  exposing  Chris- 
tianity by  submitting  it  to  the  test  of  reason  ;  so  far  am  I 
from  judging  this  a  trial,  which  it  is  by  no  means  fitted  to 
endure,  that  I  think,  on  the  contrary,  the  most  violent  attacks 
that  have  been  made  upon  the  faith  of  Jesus,  have  been  of 
service  to  it.  Yes  :  I  do  not  hesitate  to  affirm,  that  our  reli- 
gion hath  been  indebted  to  the  attempts^  though  not  to  the 
intentions^  of  its  bitterest  enemies.  They  have  tried  its 
strength  indeed,  and,  by  trying,  they  have  displayed  its 
Strength  ;  and  that  in  so  clear  a  light,  as  we  could  never  have 
hoped,  without  such  a  trial,  to  have  viewed  it  in.  Let  them 
therefore  write,  let  them  argue,  and,  when  arguments  fail,  even 
let  them  cavil  against  religion  as  much  as  they  please  :  I  should 
be  heartily  sorry,  that  ever  in  this  island,  the  asylum  of  liberty, 
where  the  spirit  of  Christianity  is  better  understood  (however 
defective  the  inhabitants  are  in  the  observance  of  its  precepts) 
than  in  any  other  part  of  the  Christian  world  ;  I  should,  I  say, 
be  sorry,  that  in  this  island,  so  great  a  disservice  were  done  to 
religion,  as  to  check  its  adversaries,  in  any  other  way,  than  by 
returning  a  candid  answer  to  their  objections.  I  must  at  the 
same  time  acknowledge,  that  I  am  both  ashamed  and  grieved, 
when  I  observe  any  friends  of  religion,  betray  so  great  a  dif- 
fidence in  the  goodness  of  their  cause  (for  to  this  diffidence  it 
can  only  be  imputed)  as  to  show  an  inclination  for  recurring 
to  more  forcible  methods.  The  assaults  of  infidels,  I  may 
venture  to  prophesy,  will  never  overturn  our  religion.  They 
will  prove  not  more  hurtful  to  the  Christian  system,  if  it  is 
allowed  to  compare  small  things  with  great ^  than  the  boisterous 
winds  are  said  to  prove  to  the  sturdy  oak.  They  shake  it  im- 
petuously for  a  time,  and  loudly  threaten  its  subversion; 
whilst,  in  effect,  they  onlv  serve  to  make  it  strike  its  roots  thev 
deeper,  and  stand  the  firmer  ever  after. 

One  word  more  with  the  essayist,  and  I  have  done.  ''  Upon 
"  the  whole,"  says  he,  "  we  may  conclude,  that  the  Christimn 


CONCLUSION.  5Cli 

*-^  rdigioriy  not  only  was  at  first  attended  with  miracles,  but 
*'  even,  at  this  day,  cannot  be  believed  by  any  reasonable  per- 
**  son  without  one.  Mere  reason  is  insufficient  to  convince 
*'  us  of  its  veracity  ;  and  whoever  is  moved  by  faith  to  assent 
*'  to  it :"  that  is,  whoever  by  his  belief  is  induced  to  believe  it, 
"  is  conscious  of  a  continued  miracle  in  his  own  person, 
**  which  subverts  all  the  principles  of  his  understanding,  and 
"  gives  him  a  determination  to  believe,  what  is  most  contrary 
*'  to  custom  and  experience."  An  author  is  never  so  sure  of 
writing  unanswerably,  as  when  he  writes  altogether  unintelli- 
gibly. It  is  impossible  that  you  should  fight  your  enemy  be- 
fore you  find' him  ;  and  if  he  hath  screened  himself  in  dark- 
ness, it  is  next  to  impossible  that  you  should  find  him^ 
Indeed,  if  any  meaning  can  be  gathered  from  that  strange 
assemblage  of  words  just  now  quoted,  it  seems  to  be  one  or 
other  of  these  which  follow :  either^  That  there  are  not  any  in 
the  world,  who  believe  the  gospel ;  or.  That  there  is  no  want 
of  miracles  in  our  own  time.  How  either  of  these  remarks,  if 
just,  can  contribute  to  the  author's  purpose,  it  will  not,  I  sus- 
pect, be  easy  to  discover.  If  the  second  remark  is  true,  if 
there  is  no  want  of  miracles  at  present,  surely  experience  can- 
not be  pleaded  against  the  belief  of  miracles  said  to  have  been 
performed  in  time  past.     Again,  if  the  first  remark   is  true, 

fif  there  are  not  any  in  the  world  who  believe  the  gospel,  be- 
cause, as  Mr.  Hume  supposeth,  a  miracle  cannot  be  believed 
•ivithout  a  new  miracle,  why  all  this  ado  to  refute  opinions 
which  nobody  entertains  ?  Certainly,  to  use  his  own  words, 
*'  The  knights-errant,  who  wandered  about  to  clear  the  world 
"of  dragons  and  giants,  never  entertained  the  least  doubt 
*'  concerning  the  existence  of  these  monsters*." 

Might  I  presume  faintly  to  copy  but  the  manner  of  so  ini- 
mitable an  original,  as  the  author  hath  exhibited  in  his  conclud- 
ing words,  I  should  also  conclude  upon  the  whole,  That 
miracles  are  capable  of  proof  from  testimony,  and  there  is  ^ 
full  proof  of  this  kind,  for  those  said  to  have  been  wrought  in 

.support  of  Christianity ;  that  whoever  is  moved,  by  Mr. 
Hume's  ingenious  argument,  to  assert,  that  no  testimony  can 
give  sufficient  evidence  of  miracles,  admits  for  rea^on^  though 
perhaps  unconscious,  a  mere  subti/ty^  which  subverts  the  evi- 
dence of  testimony,  of  history,  and  even  of  experience  itself, 
giving  him  a  determination  to  deny,  what  the  common  sense 
of  mankind,  founded  in  the  primary  principles  of  the  under- 
standing, would  lead  him  to  believe. 

■  '   *  $ee  the  first  paragjaph  of  Essay  12.    Of  the  aca^Jemical  orswpfical  pViilO- 

fiWphjl, 

THJl'  END. 


INDEX. 


A                                                         A.  Page 

BBOTS                               -                        -  -                        286 
Acjcius,  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  cited,  judged,  and  deposed  by  the  pope  208 . 

Ach<ilius,  the  first  who  had  the  title  of  the  pope's  vicar  272 

Alexandria,  the  first  place  where  every  church  had  one  presbyter  133 

Altensfaig,  quoted                           -                          -  •                          154' 

Ambrosiaster                    -                          -                          -  -             116 

Ammianus  Marcellinus,  quoted                           -  -                         200 

Anchorets                                                  -                         -  -             284 

Angels,  meaning  of  the  term                               -  -                   82, 113 
Apiarius,  declared  innocent  by  two  popes,  though  convicted  of  the  most 

heinous  crimes                           -                          -  -                           235 

Apocaiypse.epistles  to  the  Asian  churches  in  the             -  -       82,87 

Apostles,  what                             .                         .  »                           75 

Apostolical  constitutions,  the                  .                         .  -             193 

Appropriation,  what                     -                          .  -                          134 

Archbishop,  use  of  the  term                   -                         -  -            146 

Archdeacons                                  .                        .  -                         139 

Arian  controversy             -                         -                         -  218, 222 

Asceticks,           -                        -                        -                      .  -  283 

Athanasius  condemned  as  a  heretick                               -  -             218 

Augustine,  his  sentiments  respecting  episcopal  jurisdiction  36 

anecdote  of  him                                     -  -                          132 

his  expressions  concerning  the  trinity          -  ■^             214  ' 

the  monk,  converts  the  AngloSaxons  in  Britain  271 

Authority,  just,  supported  by  knowledge                         -  -            328 

B. 

Babylon,  mentioned  by  Peter,  what  city             -  -                         189 

liaruabas,  his  admission  to  the  aposileship                     -  -78 

Baronius              .                         .                         _  -                 149, 351 

Basnage  quoted                ....  148 

Beatiiick  vision,  the                      -                         -  -                         219 

Becket,  Thomas              ...  -             167 

Bible,  its  trequent  and  attentive  perusal  recommended  -                           1.1 

how  it  should  be  studied                -                         -  ,12 

account  of  it                       -                         -  -                           16 

remarks  on  the  English  translation  of  it                -  -            1^ 

Biblical  studies  necessary  to  the  theologian  -                             ^ 

both  for  illustrating  and  confirming  Christianity  ib. 

Bingham,  criticism  on                  -                         -  -                  86,  112 

Bishop,  universal,  opinion  of  Gregory  i,  on  the  title  240,  297 

title  of  given  to  Boniface  iii.  -                        34S 

S  S  S 


INDEX. 

©jsliops,  their  juridical  authority,  established  by  Constantine  34 

Augustine's  seiitinents  concerning  it  36 

checked  by  Arcadius  and  rioaorius  ib. 

and  still  more  by  Valeulianus  ib. 

re  established  by  Justinian                  -  37 

prirnitive  signification  of  the  name                                   -  66 

not  successours  of  the  apostles                             -                          -  75 

nature  of  their  office  in  ihe  second  and  third  centuries  SO 

Slasphemy,  what                           -                          -                         -  356 

Bona,  cardinal,  quoted  -  -  147, 154-,  335,  339 

Boniface  iii.  obtains  the  title  of  universal  bishop                        -  548 

VIII.  his  decrees                -                         -                                 -  315 

See  Winfrid. 

jfooks,  too  mai'.y,  detrimental  to  a  student                       -                          _.  9 

first  formal  prohibition  of                         -                         -  344 

mutilated  and  adulterated  by  the  Romish  hierarchy  349 

Bossuet,  stricture  on                    -                        -                        -  374 

B  wcr  quoted  -  -  -  218,  257, 350 

Brirnia,  conversion  of                  -                          -                         -  271 

Burn's  ecclesiastical  law                          ...  133 

Jyel,  Gabriel,  quoted                   -                   '      -                        -  339 


Calvia  quotad                  -                        -                         -  -             392 

Canon,  sacred,  history  of  the                               r                          -  16 

Canons  of  a  cathedral                               -                         •-  -             138 

ecclesiastical,  what                                    _                          -  146 

Cardinals,  their  origin                               ...  318 

Cathedral,  what                            .                          -                          -  133 

Celedonius,  consequence  of  his  appeal  from  a  synod  to  the  pope  236 

Celestine,  pope,  restores  Apiarius                                      -  -             235 

Chalcedon,  council  of                   -                          -                         -  198 

Changes,  whence  they  arise                     ...  12f 

Chapters            -                          -                        .                        ,  138,  139 

Chorepiscopi                       ...  130,  141 

Christian  temperance  and  self-denial,  essay  on                             -  399 
Christianity,  study  of  the  biblical  records  necessary  for  its  confirmation 

and  illustration                          ...  6 

its  promulgation                  ...  /^, 

evidence              -                        •  -                          -  7 

moral  precepts                -                         -  -               24 

essence                ...  47 

Chrysostnm                      -                          -                         -  -              114 

Church  and  state                          -                         -                        -  21 

history  of  the,  what                   -                         -  -               22 

its  origin  and  primitive  nature                 .                          -  24 

rise  of  its  distinction  from  the  state                    -  -         24,  27 

signification  of  the  word                          -                          -  26 

its  form  of  g(>vernme>n              -                         -  -               46 

may  subsist  m  different  forms                  .                          -  50 

undergo  alterations  with  propriety             -  SO,  127 

form  of,  first  instituted  by  Christ  and  his  apostles  61 

apostolick,  constitution  of                       .                          -  90 

use  of  the  word  in  the  early  ages                          -  100,  105 

alteration  in  its  use                                    .                         -  137,  162 

schism  between  tlie  eastern  and  vvestera                          -  209 

controversies  in  the  early  ages  in                        -  -            213 


INDEX. 

Clemens  AleiandrinujB 

Romamis 
element  viti.  his  act  for  altering  books 
Clerc,  le,  quoted 
Clergy,  origin  of  the  term 
Collier's  faith 
Comnigs's  sermons 
Coficlvive,  why  so  called 
Conge  d'elire 
Consistory,  what 

Constantine,  the  founder  of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction 
's  donation 

Copronynius,  anecdote  of 
Constantinople,  council  of 
Consi.itucions,  apostolical,  the 
Consubstantiatior,  docrrineof 
Controversy,  observations  on 
Councils,  ecumenical 

what 
Courts,  ecclesiastical 
Cromwell,  maxim  of  his 
Cyprian 

excommunicated  by  pope  Stephen 
Cyril,  his  controversy  with  Nestorius 


Page 

104 

70, 153,  194 

349 

229 

151 

339 

58 

321 

139 

ib. 

34 

237 

223 

197 

193 

388 

87.  387 

147,  149.  213 

230 

142 

260 

92,  115,  267,  297 

254 

216,  223 


D. 


Dariasus,  legatine  power  introduced  by 
Deacons,  what 

how  chosen 
Deaconesses 
Deans  and  deaneries 
Decretal  epistles 
AictMiei,  what 
Didascalies 
Diocese,  what 
Dodwell,  strictures  on 

his  interpretation  of  TertuUian 

quoted 
Dominick,  St.,  the  inventor  of  the  inquisition 

order  of 
Doaatists 


272 
66,  90, 125 

92 
127 
138 
238 

66 

193 

107 

48,  52,  73,  97,  115,  124 

65 

165 

358,  361 

361 

212 


Kaster,  observance  of  -  . 

Ecclesiastical  judicature  -  - 

polity 

courts  .  _  . 

degrees,  at  first  offices,  not  dignities 
Ecclesiasticks,  rise  of  their  authority 
superiour  orders  ff 
inferiour  orders  of 

decrees  of  the  council  of  Trent  respecting  their  privileges 
reception  given  to  their  claims  by  the  secular  powtrs 


E'cnmehical  councils 


what 


193,  222,  253 

34 

46 

143 

172 

29 

147 

j6. 

307 

312 

147,  149, 213 

230 


INDEX. 

Page 

England,  ecclesiastical  judicature  in                    -                         -  39 

Ephesus,  council  of                                -                        -  -             324 
Episc'.ipacy,  see  bishops 

'Eirtirx^'Troi,  what             -                 .        -                  .       .  -                66 

Erasmus,  his  annotations  on  the  New  Testament                        -  346 

answer  to  the  protestants                          -  -             392 

Eucharist,  doctrine  of  the  real  presence  in  the                           -  388 

Eusebius                          -                         _                          -  -             143 

Eutychian  controversy             -                              -                           _  226 

Evaiigelist,  office  of  an                          -                              -  -               78 

Exarchs,  what                              ...  146 

F. 

Faith,  implicit               ....  337 
exp  icit                          ...  338 
Collier's              .                         -                          -                          -  339 
Ferdinand,  the  catholick,  introduced  the  inquisition  into  Spain           -  363 
Ferrier,  the  French  ambassadour,  his  speeches  at  the  council  of  Trent     305,  313 
Firmihan                              -                        -                          -  114,255 
Fleury,  Claude,  quoted                 .                                                    -  168 
France,  inquisition  soon  driven  out  of                 -                                      -  364 
Francis,  St.,  order  of               -                 -                                      -  361 
Fraud,  pious                      .                          .                          -                          -  238 
Fretltrick  II.  emperour  of  Germany,  takes  the  inquisitors  under  his  pro- 
tection                       -                         .                             -  -         362 
Friars                   .....  286 

G. 

Oelasius,  pope,  decree  obtained  by  him                       -                        -  257 

Germans  converted  by  Boniface  or  Winfrid             -                          -  271 

Gerson,  quoted                           ...  340 

Gibbon,  quoted             -                         -                          -                           -  244 

Gospel,  it's  promulgation  accompanied  by  miracles                            -  7 

Gospels,  many  have  been  written                                           -  19 

Grabe,  Dr.                               ...  193 

Greeks,  given  to  disputation                                     -  211 

almost  all  the  early  controversies  originated  among  them  212,  214 

Gregory  Nazianzen,  his  opinion  of  synods                             -  227 

I,  pope,  his  character  and  conduct           '    -                         -  240 

opinion  respecting  the  title  of  universal  bishop  241,  ii97 

H. 

Hadrian,  bishop  of  Thebes  -                         -                         -               237 

Hammond,  Dr.                     -  -                        -                         68,  122 

Heresy                  -                          -  -                         -                          356 

Hermits                        -  .                         -                    .284 

Hickes,  Dr.                      .  -                        -                            159,  186 

Hierarchy,  it's  rise  and  progress  -                           .46 

Hilary                 -                          .  ,                          .63,  116,  219 

blunder  respecting  him  -                                    Ho 

bishop  of  Aries,  excommunicated  by  one  pope,  sainted  by  another        236 

Poitiers,,  quoted  -                            -         ^S7 ,  358 

Honoratus,  archdeacon  of  Saloni  237 


INDEX. 

Hoornbeck  de  Episcopatu  5^ 

Houbigant's  Prolegomena                              -  ..            ■^                          19, 21 

Huss,  John  3S0 

satirical  picture  exhibited  by  r                  377 


Ignatius                         -                        -                        -  73,96,99,100 

Implicit  faith  ^^7 

Index  expurgatorius                          _                          -  -                 345 

Innocent,  pope,  advances  the  claim  of  prerogatives  derived  from  St.  Peter       256 

IV,  tribunal  of  the  inquisition  established  by  -            362 

Inquisition,  invented  by  Dominick  358,  361 

it's  rise  and  progress                            -  ^^0 

proceedings  366 

Ii^eqs-                    -                       -                       ^  99,193,266 


James,  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  not  the  apostle                          -  194 

Jerom  344 

Jerom  of  Prague                        -                        -                        -  340 
Jesuits,  speech  of  their  general,  at  the  council  of  Trent,  on  the  papal 

authority                         -                          -                          -  291 

'■'            remarks  on  them                        -                        -                        -  303 

Jewish  history                        -                       -                        -                -  6 

its  necessity  to  theological  students                       -  T 

priesthood                        -                        -                           -  156 

Jews,  no  sects  among  them,  before  they  became  acquainted  with  the  Greeks    212 

John,  pope,  his  fallibility                         -                        -                         -  219 

threatened  to  be  burned  for  a  heretick                            -  i6. 

bishop  of  Lappa                    -                -                      -                 -  237 

Josephus  recommended,  and  how  he  should  be  read                    •  13 

his  character                     -                   -»                -  {/,, 

Julian,  the  emperour                        -                        -                        -  219 

Justinian  re-established  episcopal  authority                    -                    -  37 

his  character                        .                        w                        .  233 

K. 

"Knowledge,  tends  to  the  support  of  civil  authority                        -  328 

an  enemy  to  superstition                        -                           .  329 
measures  taken  for  its  suppression  by  the  Romish  hierarchy  329,  343 

L. 

•Lactantius,  quoted  -  -  -  352, 353,  356 

iainez,  general  of  the  Jesuits,  his  speech  in  the  council  of  Trent  291 

Laity,  used  as  a  distinctive  term  for  the  people                    -                •  151 

its  etymology                     -                     -                  _                  .  154 

.Latins,  differed  in  character  as  well  as  language  from  the  Greeks  214 

Legatine  power  introduced  by  Damasus                        ■>                -  272 

Lenfant  quoted                         .                         .                         -  325 

X-eo,  pope,  his  conduct  towards  Hilarius                ^                     -  236 

X,  gave  occasion  to  the  reformation                        -                        -  381 

Liberius,  pope,  hrs  versatility                          -                        -  218 

Ttt 


INDEX. 

.  .       P^^ 

Littleton,  lord,  quoted                         -  .                        -                 168 

Logic,  romish                          -                        -  -                              263 

Luther,  his  first  step  against  papacy  -         350,  382 

the  reformat!  on  eflfected  by  him       -  383 

his  character                          -  -                         -                389 

M. 

Maccabees,  books  of               -                        -  -                               15 

Mahometism                - ,                        -  .                          -                   24 

Martm,  St.,  his  humanity                                 -  -                              359 

Martin  v,  pope,  account  of  his  coronation  -                          -                 325 

Mauricius,  the  emperour,  dethroned  and  murdered  -                             342 

• ;    ■                                      his  character  -                        -                246 

Memoiy,  mode  of  exercising  and  strengthening  -                                12 

Meiidicant  friars                 -                  -  -                                  287,  288 

Metropolitan,  rise  of  the  term                          -  _                              145 

Michaelis's  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament  -                    21 

Mill's  Prolegomena                   -                          -  -                               19 

Ministers,  study  their  duty,  and  what  -                          -                 6,  8 

their  office             -                          -  -                                  8 

how  chosen  in  the  early  ages  -                          -                     92 

Miracles  did  accompany  the  publication  of  the  gospel  -                                  7 

MonaStick  orders,  of  great  help  to  the  papacy  -                          -                  282 

their  rise  and  progress          -  -                              283 

Monks                         -                          -  .                         .                  286 

Mosaick  institution                      -                          -  -                             22 

Moulin,  Pierre  du,  quoted                  _  -                        -                  335 

N. 

Names  have  great  influence                            -  -              94, 131,  156 

Nestorius,  his  controversy  with  Cyril  -                           216,223,226 

Nuni.eries                                -                        -  .,                            287 

Nuf.s                            -                        -  -                         -                285 

O. 

Occam,  quoted                        -                        -  -                            340 

Officials,  what             -                          -  .           .               -           .      139 

Orders  holy,  curious  questions  respecting  -                              184 

Ordination,  false  notions  entertained  respecting  -                         -       .          17l 

without  a  charge,  declared  null  by  the  council  of  Chalcedon          177 

Osius,  bishop  of  Cordoua,  his  conduct  at  the  council  of  Sardica  20i 


Papacy,  its  rise  and  progress                         -                         -  187,  313 

conflict  for  the                       -                         -  -                 200 

its  early  splendour                              -                           -  200,  201 

falsehoods  and  forgeries  recurred  to  in  its  support  237 

its  decline                               ...  327 

Parish,  what                        -                        -                        -  106,  107,  135 

Patriarctis,  their  rise                          -                          -  -                     146 

Paul,  his  judgment  on  the  incestuous  person                       -  .31 

quuiifications  for  an  apostle                     -  -                      7S 


INDEX. 

Paul,  his  appointment  to  the  apostleship  .                        .             '73 

IV.  pope,  his  attempt  at  suppressing  knowledge  345 

Paulus  Samosatenus,  his  expulsion                      .  .                          I43 

Pearson,  his  Vindiciae  Ignatianse             -  .                          7j^  gg^  ig3 

stricture  on                  -                         -  -                 119,  fwte. 

Pelagians                        -                        -  -                     212,  222,  333 

Pepin,  countenanced  in  his  usurpations  by  two  popes  -                         248 

Persecution,  employed  as  an  engine  by  Rome  .                         _             353 

Petavius's  remarks  on  Tertullian                         -  -                           64, 

Peter,  president  of  the  apostolical  college  -                        ,              84 

pretences  of  the  papists  respecting           -  -                         IS? 

his  ever  having  been  at  Rome  doubtful  -                         .             188 

pr'/babl/  martyred  at  Rome                       -  .                         jgj 

claims  that  Rome  affected  to  derive  from  -                         -             252 

de  Blois,  his  abuse  of  the  word  church  .                         168 

Philip,  an  evangelist                                 -  .                         -               78 

king  of  France,  his  answer  to  pope  Boniface  -                        169 
threatens  a  pope  to  have  him  burned  for  a  heretick      219 

Phocas,  the  usurper,  his  character  and  conduct  -                        242 

Photius,  the  Greek  patriarch                   -  _                         ,             268 

Picture,  satirical,  exhibited  by  Huss                    -  -                         377 

Pious  fraud                    -                        -  -                        .             238 

Pius,  bishop  of  Rome                 -                         .  .                          IO3 

Platina,  his  history  mutilated                  ...  35O 

Polycarp,  his  epistle  to  the  Philippians               -  -                     73,  96 

Popes,  not  infallible                                -  .                        .            217 

,  their  versatility                -                         .  .                           n,^ 

one  threatened  to  be  burned  for  a  heretick  -                        .            219 

defence  of  their  claims  by  the  general  of  the  Jesuits  291 

how  elected        -                        -  _                        _            32I 

consecrated              -                        -  .                          i^^ 

Power,  its  tendency  to  increase              -  r                        -              94 

Praetextatus,  anecdote  of             -                        _  _                        201 

Prebendaries  and  prebends                      -  _                        .            133 

prelacy,  its  origin  and  progress                          -  -                108,  140 

Ilf fo^y/ff «5»  what          .                        -  -                        -              66 

Presbytery,  what                          -                         -  -                           93 

Prideaux's  Connexion                            -  _                        -              13 

Primate,  what                             -                        -  .                        I45 

Printing,  might  have  been  suppressed  at  its  commencement  -            375 

benefits  of  it                -                        -  -                        376 

Priories                            -                         -  _                         .  •           287 

Protestants,  divisions  among                               -  -                        39I 

Pseudambrose                 -                       -  -                       -            hq 

Quaker,  anecdote  of  one            -                       -  .                      511 

Quartodecimans              -                      -      .  -                       .            254 

R. 

Rasponi,  cardinal,  quoted                      -  .                       -            321 

Reading  and  learning  not  synonymous                -  -                          10 

Real  presence,  doctrine  of  the               -  -                        -            388 

Reformation,  its  commencement  and  progress  -               350,  376 

Religious,  abuse  of  the  term                 -  -                      -           286 


INDEX. 

Religious,  establishments           --                       -  „.                          8 

persecution                             -  -:                        ^            252 

Romans,  their  character             -                          .  .                         221 

Rome,  her  good  fortune  with  respect  to  dominion  -                        -            277 

RufEnus               -                       -                       -  .                       293 

Sacraments  of  the  Romish  church                     -  -                 182, 184 

unreiterable                           -  »                          _             184 

Sacred  canon,  history  of  the                               -  -                          16 

history                 -                          -  -                          -                 5 

Sagittarius,  a  Galilean  bishop,  his  enormities  -                         237 

Salonius,  a  Gallican  bishop,  his  enormities  _                          .               i^_ 
Salvation  depends  on  a  man's  belief  and  obedience  to  the  gospel,  not  on  the 

church  to  which  he  belongs                              -  -                            47 

Sardica,  council  of         -                          -  -                         >             206 

Sarpi,  Paolo,  his  character          -                         -  -                          44 

works                            -  -                         -               4^ 

quoted                  -                      -  li9, 291, 371, 372 

Scotland,  civil  powers  of  ecclesiasticks  in  -                                 38,  40 

church  judicatories  in                            -  -                          I44 

episcopalians  in                        -  -                          .  ^         18(^ 

Scriptures,  very  soon  translated                          -  -                        3^Q 

Sectaries                          -                        -  -                           49, 56,  5B 

who                              -                        -  -                          58 

Simon,  father                  -  '-                              19,  334 

Richard,  quoted  224 

Sinecures                         .                          _  -                          -             175 

Solitaries             -  .                       -  .                       -  -                          283 

Stephen  I. pope,  excommunicates  St.  Cyprian  -                         -             254 

II.            his  friendship  to  the  usurper  Pepin  2*9 

uses  the  name  of  Peter  the  apostle  -            262 

Studies,  theological,  how  to  be  prosecuted  -                              9 

Superstition,  the  support  of  tyranny  -                          -             329 

Symmachus,  pope,  disowns  the  authority  of  a  synod  -                        259 

Synagogues                     .                          -  _                          -              157 

Synods                -                       -                        -  -                145,213 

Gregory  Nazianzen's  opinion  of  -                        -            227 


Talia,  bishop  of  Alexandria                                 -                        -  237 

Tertullian  -  .  64,65,88,121,353,357 

Test-act              .                         .                        .                         •  39 

Theodoret                      ,                         -                         .  -              67 

Theologian,  study  of  the  biblical  records  necessary  to  the  ,6 

how  his  studies  should  be  prosecuted                       -  .JO 

profane  history  useful  to                              -  -               tS 

Timothy,  an  evangelist               .                          -                          -  78 

Title,  use  and  signification  of  the  word                          -  133,  178 

Tituli,  what                                  .                          .                          -  132 

Titus,  an  evangelist                                  -                          >  -               78 

Treason,  what                            ...  373 

Trent,  council  of,  speech  in  the,  respecting  the  pope's  authority  391 

reception  this  speech  met  with                       -  301 

decrees  of  it,  respecting  the  privileges  of  the  clergy  -307 


INDEX. 

Trinity,  expressions  significant  of                     .                        .  214 

Troyes,  canon  of  the  council  of            -                         -  » '           Sll 

Tyranny  requires  ignorance  and  superstition  for  its  support  223 

U. 

Ubiquitarlans                             -                       -                      -  S8S 

V. 

Valens  enlarged  the  jurisdiction  of  the  bishops                          -  36 

Valentianus  checked  the  authority  of  bishops                 -  •               «A, 

Valentinian,  his  law  in  favour  of  the  pope's  authority               -  207 

Venice,  caution  of  its  government  in  admitting  the  inquisition  -            365 

wise  regulation  respecting  the  inquisition  in                   -  371 

Victor,  his  dispute  about  the  observance  of  Easter  -            353 

Vigilius,  pope,  his  versatility                                -                         -  217 

Vision,  beatifick              -                        -                         -  -             219 

Voltaire,  quoted                           _                       »                       -  366 

W. 

Wallis,  preached  at  Avignon  against  a  doctrine  held  by  the  pope  219 

Wet  stein's  Prolegomena             ...  19 

Whitby,  Dr.                    -                         -                         -  -               80 

WicklUf              -                        -                        -                        -  380 

Wilfrid,  archbishop  of  York                   -                        -  -             237 

Wihfrid  converts  the  Germans                             -                         -  271 
V  the  first  ecclesiastick  on  record,  who  took  an  oath  of  fealty  to  the 

Roman  see                  •                        -                        >  -              ib, 

Z. 

Zachary,  pope,  assists  the  usurper  Pepin                        -  -            248 
Zozimus,  pope,  his  conduct  with  respect  to  Pelagius                 -  233 
on  the  appeal  of  Apiarius  -            235 
recurs  to  St.  Peter  as  the  sole  founder  of  the  papal  autho- 
rity                             ....  257 
Zuinglius,  his  controversy  with  Luther             -                       -  386, 388 


INDEX 


OF  THE 


DISSERTATION  ON  MIRACLES. 


Page 
Introduction  _  -  .  -  "399 

PART  I. 

Miracles  are  capable  of  proof  from  testimony,  and  religious  miracles  are  not 

less  capable  of  this  evidence  than  others  -  403 

Sect. 

I.  Mr.  Hume's  favourite  argument  is  founded  on  a  false  hypothesis  ib. 

II.  Mr.  Hume  charged  with  some  fallacies  in  his  way  of  managing  the 

argument  -      .  -  -  415 

III.  Mr.  Hume  himself  gives  up  his  favourite  argument  -  423 

IV.  There  is  no  peculiar  presumption  against  such  miracles  as  are  said  to 

have  been  wrought  in  support  ot  religion  -  -  426 

V.  There  is  a  peculiar  presumption  in  favour  of  such  miracles  as  are  said 

to  have  been  wrought  in  support  of  religion  -  432 

VI.  Inquiry  into  the  meaning  and  propriety  of  one  of  Mr.  Hiune's  favourite 

maxims  -  -  -  433 

PART  II. 

The  miracles  on  vihicb  the  belief  of  Christianity  is  founded,  are  suff,ciently  at- 
tested ....  437 

Sect. 

I.  There  is  no  presumption  arising  from  human  nature,  against  the  mira- 

cles  said  to  have  been  wrought  in  proof  of  Christianity  ib. 

II.  There  is  no  presumption  arising  from  the  history  of  mankind,  against 

the  miracles  said  to  have  been  wrought  in  proof  of  Christianity,  443 

III.  No  miracles  recorded  by  historians  of  other  religions  are  subversive 

of  the  evidence  arising  irom  the  miracles  wrought  in  proof  of 

Christianity  or  can  be  considered  as  contrary  testimony  458 

IV.  Examination  of  the  Pagan  miracles  mentioned  by  Mr.  Hume  465 
V.  Examination  of  the  Popish  miracles  mentioned  by  Mr.  Hume  474 

VI.  Abstracting  from  the  evidence  for  particular  facts  we  have  irrefraga- 

ble evidence,  that  there  have  been  miracles  in  former  times  ;  or  such 
events  as,  when  compared  with  the  present  constitution  of  the 
world,  would  by  Mr.  Hume  be  denominated  miraculous  489 

VII,  Revisa;  of  Mr.  Hume's  examination  of  the  Pentateuch  493 

Conclusion  -  -  -  -501 


■^       v,:^ 


-'•*  •Jk*k.ff 


-■  -^^- 


•J  ■ 


■*■■■>   i       .-5  ■;«*♦;» 


\VC' 


r^y-*'^'^ 


